Tapestry

micky mouse

2011-11-19T08:31:00.001-08:00

Valentine Vanity

2010-02-03T06:08:00.000-08:00

It's that time of year, when lovers plan their moves, how best to express their yearnings during the dark and dismal month of February, before joyous spring bursts upon the scene. In another sea of red, with Christmas not far behind, the winter ekes out a warm glow of hope for better times ahead.

At Curteis, the designers are naturally not unaffected by the season and have found three gift ideas to assist love-struck males keen to impress the object of their love and desire. Maybe she has already decided that she heartily returns his feelings, and needs little further encouragement. But even for the man of vanity who believes himself incomparable and fears no competitor can intervene, why take a risk? It's best to make sure.

Christmas Gift

2009-12-21T16:19:00.000-08:00

The latest twist in the roller-coaster ride in the polls which has happened in the last three months is for MORI to give the Conservatives a 17% lead in their last pre-Christmas delayed declaration.

As I have said constantly over recent weeks, the polls have followed the ‘narrative’ taking a 20% Conservative lead six months ago, down to a 6% lead in the infamous Ipsos MORI effort in November.

I have tracked the history of this change of direction from the point of view of the narrative, showing how the first person to mention the Hung Parliament was Michael Heseltine, and the second was Ken Clarke. This happened as Cameron was espousing his policy of Lisbon rebellion.

The HP narrative notably started inside the europhile wing of the Conservative Party, who were angry at Cameron’s stance.

It should be noted that today's MORI Poll showing a 17% Conservative lead does not mean the end of the Hung Parliament Narrative.

In The Guardian today, you read this -

Labour believes that, despite the PBR, it can still recover reasonably swiftly to a position where it is just 10 or so points behind the Tories in the new year, a gap narrow enough to give it hope going into an election campaign.

That tells you to expect another poll first off in the New Year from the ‘narrative-compliant’ pollsters giving a 10% lead to the Conservatives.

The game is not over yet.

They will be back at it again in January, they assure us, manufacturing the expectation of a Hung parliament.

Once the expectation is again in place, they can move from there to preparing their election-rigging strategies to bring the result about.

They will also no doubt be attempting to neutralise the effect that the new independent pollster Angus Reid Strategies is having on their plans.

It was the gap between MORI's 6% and ARS' 17% Conservative lead that did most to undercut the Hung Parliament Narrative, which has no doubt contributed to the decision to temporarily 'suspend' the HPN over the Christmas period.

They want to send everyone back to sleep, as many were becoming alerted to the discrepancies and the 'poor field work' in the polls giving the Conservatives 6%, 8% and 10% leads.

They will, meantime, no doubt try to exclude Angus Reid Strategies from pre-election polling in some way, so that they get things back as they like them, where they can create an expectation of the election result they desire, the one they intend to deliver, just like they did in 2005.

And yes, there does seem to be a whip effect being played out on Cameron to be a good boy, by Heseltine, Clarke and their friends in high places. Since Cameron's Lisbon speech, he is no longer trusted by the Europhiles. The controllers will do everything in their power to keep him at bay, and crush his efforts to hold out hopes for British Sovereignty.

Have no fear. They'll be back again with poll-rigging to the fore in the New Year. New Labour and all their trickery will be as hard to kill off as Rasputin. See Guardian article containing Labour's promised New Year narrative HERE.

SIR BOB WORCESTER of Ipsos MORI.

UPDATE - Bob Worcester of Ipsos MORI explains his new poll results at a 17% Conservative lead up from 6% last time he reported as follows -

The impact of the PBR moved the economic optimism in the country from last month’s 46% believing the economy was going to improve in the next 12 months falling precipitously to 32%. At the same time, the satisfaction level of Gordon Brown fell another 10 points, to just 28% and the government also by 10 points, to 21%.

If he's right, then any more bad economic news and Labour might find they cannot manage expectations to a Hung Parliament after all. No wonder they're rushing to the finishing post, and looking at a March 25th Election date. But another small voice in the back of your mind says that at Angus Reid Strategies, the Conservative lead never left 17%, and that Bob Worcester is using the PBR as his face saver.

Another safe prediction -

If the narrative-compliant pollsters don't bottle out of complying with Labour's polling demands in Jabnuary and produce more Hung Parliament-compliant polling results, Labour will be pumping their economic achievements at the same time. Labour will be announcing the end of the recession at the moment they call the election. The question is, will anyone still believe them, or their wavering pollsters by then?

Maybe more of the pollsters will start pulling up the white flag as Bob Worcester has done this week. It's only a month ago, if you remember that he managed to grant Labour a substantial polling lead in London, based on the views of only 50 people, which did seem pretty barmy. Nice to see him back in the realm of sanity. Let's hope he stays around, and a few others from the narrative-obeying pack come across and join him.

Sir Bob Worcester's Bio on Wiki -

He was made an Honorary Knight Commander of The Most Excellent Order of the British Empire in 2004 in recognition of the “outstanding services rendered to political, social and economic research and for contribution to government policy and programmes”. He took British citizenship later that year, and in 2005 his knighthood was made substantive[1] (allowing him to use the title "Sir").

Clearly Sir Bob Worcester owes much to New Labour for his advancement, but then, for sure, they no doubt owe him and his ilk quite a lot for theirs! Perhaps Christmas is a good time for all narrative-compliant pollsters to be considering the best place for their future loyalties to lie. After all, Rasputins usually end up getting done in one way or another. Why be amongst the casualties?

The Final Days Of British Democracy

2009-12-14T17:49:00.000-08:00

The new ICM Poll puts Conservatives on 40% and Labour on 31%, up from 29%, borrowing 1% from Lib Dems and 1% from Others. It doesn't shout at you as being extremely outrageous, and yet I have my doubts.

The problem is that, again just as last time, the narrative saying this is the new trend that would happen, preceded the poll. which is all a tad suspicious to my mind.

HPN1 (Hung Parliament Narrative 1) originated from Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine in November, hard on the heels of Cameron's post-Lisbon policy announcement. This narrative was then picked up and run with by all media, yet the polls were, at that time, saying a Conservative Majority of 60.

Then out of the blue, as if to order, came Ipsos MORI's 6% Conservative lead based on a tiny sample (London was 53, where Labour were awarded a large majority), and HPN1 went mainstream in all media, as if, all along, it had been the only story in town. It wasn't. It was a dramatic change.

The next narrative, HPN2, released a week ago, was in fact a Labour victory narrative. It appeared in The Times, sourced from Labour Election Planners. This stated that the current 8% Conservative lead (which in some polls was still given as 17%) could be overturned by Election Day to 0%, with 5% of Lib Dems and 3% of Others returning to Labour. This was another stunning change, notionally eliminating a once 20% Conservative polling lead to zero, all within a year, and yet that was not even mentioned.

The HNP2 narrative was repeated yesterday, as the ICM Poll came out showing this exact trend, with Lib Dems switiching to Labour and also Others switching to Labour, exactly as predicted the week before.

If the process happened the other way around, I would be a little happier. If first came the supposedly scientific test - the poll - and then the narrative based on its findings, the interpretation, came second, I would not be so sceptical.

But this is like East Anglian University Climate Forecasting. You first decide what result you want, and then you match your findings accordingly to give it. Iraqi WMD comes to mind as another example.

All such distortions of scientific data have a purpose. That purpose is the exercise of power. Money comes from Climate Taxes. War from wrong military intelligence, and electoral advantage would comes from 'polling to order', were that indeed also happening.

The polls and the narratives that appear to inform them, are, in my opinion, now being designed for one purpose - to prepare expectations for election results. Achieving the actual election results they desire, presents the controllers with no difficulty, and can be achieved by postal vote exercises and ballot box handling processes easily enough, but the result that is delivered, can only be delivered if the public don't suspect that anything is untoward about it.

People still believe that the electoral system is working, so the controllers have to carry on with the fiction. In other countries they don't even bother pretending, which in a few years time, will no doubt also be the case in Britain. But right now it controls people more successfully that the fiction of electoral fairness is continued with, for as long as people are still prepared to believe in it.

By a continual drip drip in the media of an expected election result over many months, cleverly disguised in polling trends which are created to order, and through narratives in support, the public can be prepared for the electoral result that the election controllers desire.

That way the public's acquiescence in their own enslavement can be more surely achieved. There is no need for a dramatic throwing out of all MPs from Parliament and the surrounding of the Palace Of Westminster with troops. The process of disempowering MPs and the destruction of democracy can be far more assuredly achieved by sinister behind-the-scenes tampering, which few even realise is happening. By the time they do, it will all be over.

Since Cameron's Lisbon address, he has worried the controllers with his talk of repatriation of powers and a Soveriegnty Bill. They are no longer prepared to grant him an election victory, and ever since that moment all the narratives have been changed accordingly.

Did Cameron break cover too early? I don't think he had a choice. His pre-Lisbon stance was easier to disguise, but Lisbon was over, and he had to make himself clear.

The controllers really want a Labour victory to keep the EU safe, while all the power structures are set up which will ensure Britain is locked in, but the swinging of expectations to that extent, is probably deemed impossible at this stage, although they are trying to go as far as a Labour Victory Narrative if they can.

The Hung Parliament narratives are, for now, the ones being deployed, and the public are gradually being prepared for Cameron's removal from the game of political theatre, while the controllers seek out a new safer pair of hands to 'lead' the Conservative Party - the next Blair, who will agree to all the controllers demand in return for personal advancement, which was what they thought they had in Cameron.

The public are not likely to see that any of what is being done, as they are unable to contemplate that things have gone so far. The evidence does not comply with the conventional explanations of politics. It does, however, comply with the explanation I give, does it not?

PICTURE - Hat Tip - politicalbetting.com

German Parliament To Tell The Kids When To Come Home

2009-07-01T07:17:00.000-07:00

The German Constitutional Court has spoken. What has it said? A copy in English of its decision appears on Grahnlaw. I am trying to read it disturbed by kids on all sides demanding attention, which is not ideal, but life is like that these days!

To my way of thinking, it asks a question of the German Parliament and that question is simply 'are you sure you want to legislate away the democratic rights of the German people?.

If so you are entitled to do so, but so that the courts can be certain, we need each of the powers vested in you to be legislated away in clear form, not with one broad brush stroke merely handing over your power to another body in perpetuity (the EU).

The EU does not have a democratic basis (but one based solely on international agreement) and handing power to the EU permanently, so that no ratification of its actions are required would not be allowed.

The EU cannot commit its member states to making war, for example, in any circumstances, and other crucial areas of government decision making cannot be handed over to the EU.

In other words the Lisbon Treaty and no other Treaty can be permitted to take away the powers of the German parliament, as the only basis for action that the EU has in Germany is and has to be founded entirely on the agreement of the German Parliament.

It's like saying to the kids, 'ok you can all go to the party, but just remember that you have to come home when we, or rather when the German Parliament says so.'

Ralph Grahn, the EU lawyer, doesn't see it that way of course. He's gone off with a lyrical poetic ode, praising the joys of the new world order where lawyers can make even more money without having to bother listening to anyone - not even the German Constitutional Court, it appears!

He writes as follows - If and when a uniform European people is constituted as the subject of legitimisation, and it is able to express its majority will in a politically effective manner that takes due account of equality in the context of the foundation of a European federal state, the road to a European federation is clear.

Dream on, Ralph! Your totalitarian state has been well and truly rumbled, and a few well-crafted words cannot hide the fact.

The EU party's not quite over yet sadly, but your ship is holed below the water line and listing. All we need is the coming financial crash and you lot are all mincemeat. Enjoy the jelly and ice cream. It might be your last scoop.

The party will soon be over. The German Constitutional Court has just informed you that the EU doesn't hit the necessary standard of acceptability, and nor is it likely to. They said it, however in such polite language that you missed the primary message completely.

I find that when children won't listen to a kind rebuke, next stop is usually a firmer reprimand. Don't cry though, Ralph. We all love you really.

UPDATE - From Hermitter writing in Nosemonkey comments...

ne should not overlook that quite influential and powerful political forces were backing this constitutional complaint. E.g., Dr Peter Gauweiler is not only a “simple” Bundestag MP, but is acting on behalf of the most powerful conservative fraction within the CDU/CSU. Dr Gregor Gysi is the head of the Socialists, who are very strong in former East Germany; and Baden-Wurttemberg, as one of the most powerful laender, filed the complaint on behalf of the Bundesrat and rest of the Bundeslaender.

So, it wasn’t just “one individual” complaining to the Court, but the most powerful political forces (besides the federal government) in the country. Different from the US Supreme Court, the German Constitutional Court has a ruling-history of seeking consensus and seldom writes opinions that are dissenting too far from “public opinion”. The court uses often “proportionality” to decide what is conform with the Basic Law (and what not). E.g., possessing a small bag of cannabis for one’s own use is fine, says the BVerfG, because law enforcement must be balanced against the right to “free development of personality”. The same “proportionality” is normally applied as a lubricant when the BVerfG meshes with EU law. Each side is jealous of its prerogatives but also eager to avoid confrontation. If seen under this perspective, this ruling of June 30, 2009, is rather a “tsunami” than a “gentle breeze”. You have to read the whole decision very closely (including the complainants’ arguments) to understand this . . . and don’t be fooled by the polite, moderate wording of the verdict. This is just part of this court’s disposition.

As a matter of fact, this dicision ended the “dream” of a European Federation for good (at least as long as Germany is part of the Club.

Censored?

2008-08-15T20:14:00.000-07:00

This person is Vaclac Klaus, President of the Czech Republic. I just wrote a blog post and wanted attach this picture of him. I went into Blog-edit and all the posts in 2008 had gone! I am sure there is an explanation other than a bit of hacking from somewhere. The posts still appear to readers but I cannot edit right now. I'll try again in the morning! Meanwhile Klaus has played the ball into his opponents' court with his comments on the EU's folly in Kosovu. Read it below.

BLOG MIGRATED. CLICK HERE

2007-09-19T10:50:00.001-07:00

gone to tapestrytalks.typepad.com

Cameron's Crisis

2007-07-28T03:03:00.001-07:00

In truth it is Britain which is in crisis. We are about to be broken up totally against our will into a group of powerless regions or newly created statelets, where democratic input is minimal. This is still and has always a stealth programme, now in the hands of the stealth Prime Minister.

The Constitution is merely how they hope to lock the gate and throw away the key, so the chewing up of the meal can really begin.

We are governed 80% from Brussels already even before we are broken up. Parliament is a sham providing no proper scrutiny, but theatre where great Europeans can parade their egos in adoration by the media.

Our elections are becoming substantially rigged with postal vote fraud and ballot box tampering.

If we sit back for a few seconds and take it all on board, we are actually lost right now, and it will take a very determined programme from somewhere to put things back where they should be.

The law cannot defend private citizens from violent crime. Educational standards are plummeting. There is no respect for or fear of authority anywhere. The only question is who has the strength or determination to stop this process rotting us away.

David Cameron certainly has the right instincts and many polices to put Britain's broken society back together, but how will he ever achieve anything if he cannot first put power and democratic accountability back where it belongs in Parliament and away for Brussels and its latest gauleiter Gordon Brown.

He is completely compromised by the europhile rump in the Conservative Party like Ken Clarke, John Bercow and as was a few Quentin Davies' and to a lesser extent William Hague, who doesn't seem to get the urgency of the crisis..

Cameron is 100% dependent on the media to present him to the voters, which is why so much effort has gone into pretending to be Blair-like and so on. He has succeeded in making the media like him, which is a valuable achievement but it has been at the expense of the belief of the majority of his own supporters. This ‘positioning’ process of media engagement has to ease up now or it will bring about the end of his term as leader from within the party. There is no choice. The media cannot be the total priority any longer.

So where to next?

The answer is that he must open up non-media channels – increase internet use - and communicate to voters directly as small parties do. First Cameron will have to consolidate the core range of policies which excite his own supporters and which excite other potential electors. Then a programme of regular door to door leafleting, postering must be embarked upon nationally. Conservative supporters must engage in a weight loss programme by forming an army to bypass the main media to ensure the message gets delivered, wearing out shoe leather.

The in-house rump of Europhiles must be shuffled off. It is really the job of their Constituents to push out the likes of Ken Clarke. Rushcliffe have tried deselection against him before, but he dodged it. It won’t keep him out of the media but it will mean that Cameron doesn’t have to bother as much about his effects.

Cameron must then promote those within the Party who are serious about the issues, and not the best media image creators as advocated constantly by Iain Dale and the like. The Tim Montgomerie seriousness should be allowed to predominate, the Cornerstone, John Hayes, John Redwood and IDS.

How long has Cameron got?

Brown will go to the country next May at the earliest. He seems to be more concerned with other political threats right now as much as the Conservatives and Lib Dems, swinging away from permissiveness and towards pseudo-authoritarianism and (false) nationalism. He is seeing canvas returns showing support for the BNP is at levels which must be concerning him, judging by his language. Unless the Conservatives move into the slot and provide a much more hardline version of Conservatism – not as rhetoric or tone – but as policies – we will be outflanked on the right by Brown as he tries to see off the threat to his vote by the BNP.

Brown’s talking of ‘British jobs for British people’ and ‘repatriating 4000 illegal immigrants’. He’s cancelled the casinos, is raising the stakes on cannabis and wanting to tackle antisocial behaviour.

Apart from the casino policy which is effective, the others are going to be all talk unless there is major alteration to the criminal justice system sufficient to bring fear and respect back into our society. That won’t be possible inside the EU. Britain has reached a crisis point. For the first time the EU drift is coming up against strong fast-growing resistance. The Party that delivers the end of the EU and repairs Britain will be the one to hold power. There is no reason why that should not be the Conservatives. It certainly won’t be Labour or the Lib Dems. If we fail, there is little doubt that the resistance will move across and grow faster in previously minor parties.

I think we have 6 months to reset the trend. I have no doubt that Cameron has the seriousness of purpose. But will he be able to be more than a one trick pony? He knows the media game. Can he impose authority? There are the people inside the Party who could help him, but will he turn to the right ones?

No I'm Not A Girl

2007-07-26T03:20:00.001-07:00

I found folk on PB (politicalbetting.com) discussing my sex today. Yes I am male. My blogname tapestry is female sounding, I admit.

I used to blog on ft.com in the 1990's. A bloke called Stephen Saines who lived in Canada awarded the regular contributors to the 'euro' threads names, based on the pieces on a monopoly board. As I was the eurosceptic pro-UK pound contributor, he called me 'top hat'. Up til then I'd used my real name 'henry'.

I found that often my posts would not get through. When I changed my name they suddenly would get through again so I started inventing names that would be recognised by my fellow correspondents ( I don't think we called ourselves bloggers in those days).

'Top Hat' became 'topper' then'tapper' then 'tapestry' then 'teapastry' then 'tapestory' and so on. So when I started blogging in 2006 due to illhealth and having to stop work, I went back and used one of my old ID's.

Some people say that you should blog in your own name. One reason I don't do that, is that when I go on search engines to track things I've written on non-political topics in publications, there can be too many 'whacks' of my name from political blogs, mking search awfully hard work. I keep my real name for my business and other non-political writing.

To complete the story, others often replied to me as 'tap' rather than tapestry. When I started my blog on google, I could use the-tap.blogspot and it sounded OK. I had a lot of strange events on my google blog after writiing against well-known and well-resourced individuals and started a second blog here using Tapestrytalks inspired by Dizzythinks. By copying around a few, it is harder for any blockers or hackers to make trouble.

Britain's Fifth Column Falsify Information To Attack Cameron

2007-07-25T23:20:00.001-07:00

The attacks on Cameron were initiated by Rupert Murdoch according to Stephan Sheakespeare who was told three weeks or so ago by a Murdoch editor that Murdoch had decided to be rid of Cameron and replace him with Hague. This coincided with the Brown takeover and with Cameron strongly resisting the EU Constitution.

The only polling organisation to provide hopeful polls to Brown after the by-elections was ICM Guardian. The first poll was a survey which did not ask about voting intention. The questions were 1. which party did you vote for at the election and 2. which party do you feel warmest to now? From these answers, voting intention was deduced.

The results look odd as 'others' has been awarded 9%. Most other polls find others on around 15%. At Sedgefiled, others were on 20%. At Southall where the voting mix is not as typical, others were on 10%.

Judging by the obvious bias in the most recent poll focused entirely on Cameron, not even asking anyone if they liked Cameron and the Conservative Party, it would not be unreasonable to deduce that ICM Guardian's recent polling has become blinded by the need to ramp up the pressure on Cameron.

The BBC has clearly been running the narrative about Cameron's trip to Rwanda being a wrong move. His time spent in his Constituency beforehand visiting flood-affected people - two days - was not even reported. The media bias in this country and the blatant attempt to unseat yet another Conservative leader by providing effective lies to suit, is downright pathetic.

If there 2 letters written to the 1922, one would be Bercow who is usually to the fore in these media coordinated games. The other could be Ken Clarke, or another Europhile. If the pro-European conspiracy cannot unseat Cameron this time, they will probably try again in a few months time. If I was a Conservative eurosceptic doubting Cameron's strength of will to fight on my behalf, I would be feeling most encouraged by Cameron. Not from what he's telling me himself so much, but from what the stealth enemies of Britain and our democracy are trying to do to Cameron.

Gordon Brown's Dull As Ditch Water

2007-07-25T00:58:00.001-07:00

Many Cameron critics on Conservative Home want Conservatives out there attacking Gordon Brown every day. Huntsman wants a full scale assault.

In the same way that it helps Cameron when people attack him, it gives Brown oxygen, energy, something to fight against. The one thing you need if you want to look like the man of the moment is someone to attack you. It makes you look powerful and significant to be attacked.

Brown loves a fight. It gives him a focus. Without a fight, he's rudderless. His 'moral compass' starts spinning all over the place.

If you allow him a clean slate, to show what he truly is, it is actually quite shocking. He is objectively even duller to listen to than anyone believed. Huntsman would help Brown by giving him a verbal war. Don't oblige him. He'll prove his overwhelming dullness much better all by himself. All the time he was Chancellor, he was energised by his hatred of Blair. Now he has no one to hate. His cabinet meetings demonstrate the 100% sycophancy of his team, and their knowledge that it doesn't pay to displease the Gord. He rules supreme. He has everything he ever wanted, and God it's dull.

His programmes too are starting to match his personal dullness. No stylish gambling surrounded by high class hookers. It's cloth cap down the bookies and the national lottery only. Drinking to be curtailed. Parking to be made a nightmare. His one claim to the voters' confidence is that he will be competent. But we already know he's a one trick pony. Money. Billions of it. From the taxpayer, which all gets wasted before it can do anything. In ten years he doubled the size of the state, and halved the amount people get from it.

We don't need to provide him with cover by attacking too hard. Let Gordon Brown have the airwaves all to himself. The public will soon be so bored they'll be crying out for someone with some life in them. Even Ming Campbell has started to look interesting. That's the measure of Brown's dullness. The phrase 'dull as ditch water' sums him up. Dullness is his primary defensive tactic. This week, for example, if he can only make floods seem boring, then people will think about something else, and not the fact that it was him personally, Gordon Brown that cut the spending on flood defences despite all the warnings, and no one else.

Don't forget the quote - my enemy is my helper. It was never truer than for Gordon Brown. He cannot generate energy without an enemy to provide it. Deny him, Huntsman. Don't feed. He'll drown is his own dullness much quicker if he we go quiet. Cameron's playing him just right.

Cameron Loves His Bashers

2007-07-24T09:10:00.001-07:00

The day they stop bashing Cameron on CH is the day he's over.

In right wing politics, bashing is the equivalent of imitation - the sincerest form of flattery. It betrays interest to bash. If there is no interest, silence is the response.

Bash away. The more noise the better. Democracy works because debate improves.

That's why Nulab are such a disaster. They sit there in worshipful silence, and turn into scalded cats if anyone dares to even question the pronouncements of their Gord.

The other wonderful thing about Cam-bashing on Con Home is that it sure as hell confuses the left wingers at the BBC, and the Grauniad. How can this ill-disciplined rabble ever expect to make any progress, they muse.

They keep repeating in their narrative what a disaster the grammar school debate was. That's because they haven't had even one debate in Nulab for fifteen years. In fact the grammar school debate was a refreshing outbreak of democratic process and it resulted in a sound policy compromise.

If we go quiet and become like them, we'll fail this country like them. Bash away. Cameron loves it. He's a localist, and localism needs bashers.

Which tune shall we dedicate to Cameron and the spirit of open debate tonight, Cam-bashers?

Cry Me A River? or why not Whitney – I’ll Always Love You?

Gordon's Barking

2007-07-24T06:28:00.000-07:00

Cameron should have known that there were going to be floods. They happen like clockwork every sixty years. 1947 was the last time. Surely he realised these ones would be coming in 2007. What a useless leader of the Conservative Party. If I was an MP, I'd immediately write to the 1922 committee, and demand a leader who at least knows the long range weather forecast - especially when the meteorological office doesn't. I mean. What are politicians for?

BBC Website Headline - Tories to fight for referendum on EU Constitution. So why do they interview Nigel Farage? Is he a Tory? Cameron should call the BBC immediately, and explain that UKIP are a Brussels embezzling, drinking and whoring operation.

UKIP only just beat the Monster Raving Luny Party at Southall. Why doesn't the BBC call the MRLP for a comment on the EU Constitution to provide balance?

Or if they really want to hear something absolutely barking, they should call Gordon Brown.

Cameron's Post Southall Strategy

2007-07-21T11:06:00.001-07:00

Murdoch is said to be plotting to replace David Cameron with William Hague. (See below - Stepahan Shakesprare. Conservative Home)

http://www.typepad.com/t/app/weblog/post?__mode=edit_entry&id=36512630&blog_id=555190

Imagine what that does to David Cameron knowing that there is a plot to have him replaced involving his key right hand man. No wonder he went half crazy spending all his time in Ealing Southall doing his level best to drive up his credibility within the Party.

Murdoch's displeasure with David Cameron goes back to Cameron's unwillingness to pussyfoot with EU leaders, or attend News International social functions, and rub shoulders with the corrupt. Now that Cameron is making a determined fight to block the EU Constitution without the promised referendum being held first, Murdoch's displeasure and his requirements to please the EU, are moving him strongly against Cameron.

But it is Conservative MPs who decide who leads them, not the EU or Rupert Murdoch. There are not enough europhiles to raise the 15% of signatures at the 1922 committee, and the eurosceptics will be unlikely to pull the rug on David Cameron while he is committed to fighting the EU Constitution.

There is another factor. Cameron's electoral strategy is becoming unworkable.

The spread of a BNP vote around Britain is changing the electoral arithmetic sufficiently that the Conservatives no longer need 40% to win an election. If the BNP are to land between 5-10% in all constituencies, and pull their votes predominantly from Labour, or parties other than Conservatives as they did at Sedgefield, the Conservatives could win an election with the 37% they were already achieving until recently.

With 'other' parties growing their support all the time, it is becoming nigh impossible for any party to get up to 40+% anyway. 'others' already have 16% in polls. By 2009 this could well be 20%. In the 1990's, when Conservative votes were 40+%, 'others' were more like 7%.

Cameron is going nuts trying to broaden the appeal of the party to Lib Dems and other sectors desperately hoping to find a way up to the 40+% level. Maybe he should rethink now, and forget this strategy. If he can consolidate the party at the 37% he is achieving, and he settles everyone down, allowing policies to be Conservative type policies, the work of the BNP especially in decimating labour's vote will bring the target within range. All he has to do now is consolidate.

Maybe while he's in Rwanda, he'll think of this and come back a different man.

BNP Puts Brakes On Brown, Helps Cameron

2007-07-21T10:28:00.000-07:00

At Sedgefield the BNP's candidate Andrew Spence, of fuel protest fame, and previously of UKIP, won 9% of the vote. 9% is not enough to win a seat. Nor was it not enough to change the result by pulling votes from other parties.

But if the same 9% vote was cast for the BNP in a marginal seat, and the 9% had been pulled from one party more than another, such a vote could change the result very easily. UKIP, for example pulled 2% in the last general election, and thereby prevented around 30 seats from falling to the Conservatives, adding 25 seats to Labour, securing their majority, and presenting 5 seats to the Lib Dems. Without UKIP's paltry 2% vote, Labour's 60 seat majority might have been eliminated. (Christopher Booker, Sunday Telegraph)

The BNP have so far stood only in their hotspots such as in Yorkshire and East London. They have occasionally seemed close to winning a Westminster seat in Barking. They have not so far strayed out from their 'racial fault line' heartlands. So is the thought about whether they might be influential on the result of the next general election, only of academic interest?

They have also elected a few councillors here and there winning up to 30% in council elections, but surely they don't have the resources to spread out any further, and go national.

BNP's STRATEGY

If reports coming from within the Party are correct, the BNP could have an effect on the next general election of the kind I am describing, as they are setting up branches in 500 Constituencies. That would mean they will be standing in many marginals. If they start to poll 9% across these seats, the effect of the BNP standing, could be dramatic.

They have no media support, no radio, no TV but they have foot soldiers. BNP members are highly motivated and deliver literature to peoples' homes by wearing out shoe leather. The story put out by the main media is that they are racist beasts who must be stopped. This may be true, but it allows the BNP to surprise people by the common sense sounding literature they write. Some of the facts contained in their writing might need to challenged, but as the party are blanked by the media, they can write their own narratives unopposed. They are able to present themselves as victims of unfair media coverage.

SEDGEFIELD

The Sedgefield by-election showed the Conservatives' vote staying level, Lib Dem rising a little and only labour's vote falling. It seems from Sedgefield as if the advance of the BNP is going to hurt Labour the most. This is bound to start featuring in electoral calculations, and could be the key factor that stops Gordon Brown going to the polls in a hurry. Cameron might start to feel grateful for having the pressure taken off him (for now) by the BNP.

Sedgefield Has Changed The Electoral Arithmetic

2007-07-20T10:29:00.000-07:00

Cameron has done well in that many feared that BNP penetration outside the cities might be partly at the expense of Conservative support. It seems not.

From the BNP website referring to its 9% of the vote as 'victory' -

'This is a huge leap forward in an area where we have only recently set up local units; the mix of farming and former mining areas of Co. Durham cannot be considered our traditional kind of support base but proves convincingly that the BNP has an appeal beyond those parts of Britain suffering on the fault lines of multiculturalism.'

All Conservatives have to do is to avoid erosion by 'others', and Labour's vote will be the one to be eroded.

UKIP changed the results of maybe 30 seats in 2005 with 2% of the vote taken mostly from Conservative. If BNP start stripping away Labour support at three times that rate, it could lose Labour 100 or more seats, and let the Conservatives in.

If Cameron stands firm on national issues such as the USER referendum, on the West Lothian issue, and so on, he could see Gordon Brown's vote decimated while he hangs on to his. (Union of Subservient European Regions)

Sedgfield is the moment politics in Britain changed. Tony has given Gordon his parting gift. Brown will not be seeking an election anytime soon.

Not one commentator noticed.

Cameron takes On the Union of Subservient European Regions

2007-07-18T07:31:00.000-07:00

Why is Clarke speaking out pro-U.S.E.R on the BBC?

Because he's got the backing of Murdoch and the BBC. As Stephan Shakespeare suggests in his column, Murdoch is seeking Cameron's replacement with Bildeberger Hague who would be USER-compliant. (Union of Subservient European Regions).

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/columnists/2007/07/stephan-shakesp.html

The reason the media catapulted Cameron ahead of Liam Fox to win the Party leadership was not because he would put up such a contest against the USER Constitution. They thought he would be the next Blair - tradeable to sell Britain down the river.

The only people who can get rid of Ken Clarke are his Constituents in Rushcliffe. Cameron doesn't have Hague's support to ditch Clarke. If he tried, the media would move to assassinate him as they did IDS and Thatcher before him.

Cameron's demise is already being demanded by the USER. Murdoch is hoping to deliver it in favour of William Hague.

Cameron must stand firm, and somehow Conservative Constituents must wake up and kick out the USERphiles. Cameron's not being a traitor has shocked Murdoch and the USER. they thought he would roll over and agree to anything in return for good media, like Blair.

Bees Dying Off Threatens Human Food Supply

2007-07-17T10:16:00.001-07:00

My cousins who live in New Zealand called in today at my UK farm to see my old Dad who's not too good. They are producers of manduka honey over there and they sell it mostly in japan. I asked them what they thought was killing the bees in the USA and in the UK. Their reply was shocking.

British scientists developed a Brassica (cabbage) modified with the Bt gene, known to kill caterpillars and moths.

The scientists were quoted - 'In research done so far, we have found that if you feed the Bt brassicas to diamond-back moth and cabbage white caterpillars they all die within 48 hours, leaving the plant virtually undamaged. If the caterpillars are killed before they reach maturity and breed, then resistance does not develop.'

Unfortunately the dumbos didn't imagine the obvious. If it kills moths and caterpillars, maybe it will kill other insects. It appears now that it is killing off the whole population of bees in the USA, which could lead on to mass starvation, if the process is not reversed. The plant Bt Brassica is being widely gorwn and bees are dying across the world in their billions.

Bees are essential to the production of one third of human food directly through their role in fertilising crops. They are also essential to the feed production of animals that make up another one third of our diet. This most vital process to human survival is threatened by the careless modification of foods carried out by scientists thinking in only one box at a time.

This is exactly what was forecast to happen by many people. You cannot trust governments and scientists to work responsibly. The fiasco is being kept out of all media cross the west as the threat is so severe to the survival of the human race that no one dares to report it. The News Channels are being asked to report the story of the collpase of the bee population, but to blame it on other causes, none of which are capable of explaining the sudden extermination that is happening.

I heard a radio programme on this in the UK recently. There was no mention of any possible connection Genetically Modified crops. Have the scientists done us in good and proper this time?

My cousins' view from the bee-keeping world was that honey produced from bt Brassica plants was not touched by other bees, once the bt brassica affected bees had died. This is most unusual as bees normally pile into a deserted hive for the free pickings. The genetically modified plants clearly are highly toxic to bees as well as caterpillars, and other bees can tell the honey produced is toxic. Something needs to be done urgently, if bees are to survive this toxic intervention in nature.

Murdoch Goes For Cameron's Jugular

2007-07-17T00:16:00.000-07:00

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/columnists/2007/07/stephan-shakesp.html

Murdoch's Press is now out to finish off David Cameron's leadership of the Conservatives. Cameron's standing up to the EU Constitution, which was not in the script when he won total media backing to get the Party leadership. He was meant to be the 'next Blair' who would trade all for personal ambition.

But Cameron's turning out to be far more subtle than Murdoch realised. Murdoch's the EU's main agent in Britain - ensuring all political leaders that win power are committed to the cause of 'ever closer union'. Murdoch assassinated IDS. His next victim he believes will be Cameron. Read Stephan Shakespeare. Hague the Bildeberger is the planned replacement. The power of the media in the UK is our biggest problem.

Murdoch must be broken up if Britain is to survive. The EU are furious with Cameron for standing up against them. How Dare He? Murdoch's getting ready to spill blood again on the EU's behalf.

GORDON BROWN'S BURNING UP

2007-07-07T07:08:00.001-07:00

GORDON BROWN'S BURNING UP

Brown’s media persona bears little resemblance to the real Gordon. You see the real Brown in the House. No confidence, no idea how to handle a brief or construct an argument. He just piles on detail upon detail hoping to bury questioners, and then switches into cliche mode for his finale (’British people’, ‘consensus’, ‘magnificent’ etc etc). It’s as if he wants to make a Budget Speech every time he takes to his feet.

If the idea is to persuade, it doesn’t. And it looks hard work.

It’s like the British Tax Code, now the most complicated and longest in the world. Brown likes to tire out opposition, bury it in quantity rather than allow it to focus on any one detail. As Chancellor, this defensive strategy, aided by Blair’s support absorbing most of the blowback, worked.

Being Chancellor is only about the monetary aspects. Imagine how hard it will be to play the ‘bury you in detail’ tactic as Prime Minister, when he will need to remember masses of detail across all aspects of government. And his cliches will be heard day in, day out, not just occasionally when he was forced out of his bunker.

Take that, and then remember that Gordon’s persona is already under stress, as it’s basically a dishonest one. He is not confident. He is being easily punctured by exposure to Parliamentary questions and debates. Some fag end. Gordon Brown’s stress level will be burning him out.

FLOODS EXPOSE LABOUR'S DESTRUCTION OF DEMOCRACY

2007-07-07T00:55:00.001-07:00

FLOODS EXPOSE LABOUR's DESTRUCTION OF DEMOCRACY

Trying to get archbishops to make flooding into a banner for socialism is pathetic. Floods hit young, old, rich, poor alike - and insurance and debt affect everyone. The poor presumably rent and can get out more easily. If they own a house, are they poor?

This is typical media news management trying to get a narrative about the floods which suits Gordon Brown. He sees the politics of floods before he sees the human problem. That's why it's taken him so long to engage with the situation.

It's taken these thickos a week to work out how to tackle this in the media, and train Gordon what his lines should be.

The real issue isn't socialism. It's that Labour haven't done anything about planning for flood defences even though floods have been predicted for years. Labour are building in flood plains across the country as we know. The warnings are broadcast frequently.

That's the real question.

How come nothing's been done?

Is the answer the corruption that pervades government now, with local democracy neutralised by Prescott? Who is there to battle powerful interest groups that make billions by building on flood plains? Prescott? Don't make me laugh. What does he care about? Money - we are told.

Labour want you to think about the socialism of floods. Well think about Labour's own role for once - not their poxy narrative. They've been in power since 1997. The old stuff about 'it's the Tories yer know' don't wash any more. Labour have destroyed local democracy by neutralising councils so they can promote their regionalisation programme. That's the story that must not come out. So they go for good old socialism, and get a bishop to start the narrative for them.

GORDON _ WHERE'S ALL THE MONEY?

2007-07-07T00:24:00.000-07:00

GORDON - WHERE'S ALL THE MONEY GONE?

Gordon Brown always used to make great play with his 'contingency fund' in the 1990's, in his 'prudence' time. No one even hears any of these words any longer, since Brown lost control of public spending after 2001.

Why did he never say - this is 'profligacy' time, when the word 'prudence' slipped from his vocabulary -so that people knew the government wouldn't have any money if an emergency occurred?

The money has all gone, that's for sure. And the gold and the oil. Where's the 'contingency fund' now, Gordon when we need it?

Labour have become disconnected from reality. We have a genuine natural disaster in what is now Brown's 'presidential' time. It doesn't fit the narrative, so it doesn't get media focus. Sorry, Hull, but you picked the wrong moment to become a disaster area.

I understand the stress and pain of floods, as we had them in Shrewsbury where I was living. Everything stops. It's like a war. People are in despair and misery as their houses, shops, pubs, schools are all taken out in one hit. John Prescott came round doing the 'we'll help you' bit. Walls were built and temporary defences can now be rushed out when the river rises. In those days Gordon hadn't given all our money away buying election victories, and funding the EU.

My advice is to call Prince Charles and ask him to come there and refuse to move until Gordon Brown puts in a personal appearance. The Queen will mention the situation at her weekly meeting with Gordon, and maybe the media will switch focus away from Al Quaeda. Start your campaign now.

Roger Scruton Credits The Culture Of Jealousy

2007-07-06T02:56:00.001-07:00

New Culture Forum - How did we end up in a position where being conservative is seen as the enemy of creativity?

Roger Scruton: Largely through ignorance. Conservatives believe that it is easier to destroy than to create; leftists try to persuade us that destruction (which they are good at) is really a kind of creation, since creation lies outside their power. This is something that George Orwell perceived clearly, even though (for reasons known only to himself) he always called himself a man of the left.

Tapestry (my comment): Propaganda is the cause, and only propaganda. Leftists need to pin all kinds of negative labels on conservatives. They cannot find much, because conservative policies work. So they look around for something else to beat conservatives with. So 'uncultured' comes into play.

Artists are usually dependent on state handouts or support in one form or another, so it is easy enough to create a world view for them which portrays those fools who pay all the bills as some kind of inferior beings, who don't understand or appreciate the intricacies of the superior intellects of artistic talents.

The notions of leftism are emotionally appealing to all who are dependent on others. The providers of society don't understand why those they support, are so resentful against them, but it is merely human nature - to resent those who provide you with what you need, if you cannot repay in equal coin or measure of some kind, or at least have no intention of doing even if you could.

The leftist cultural snobbery is just hysterical. Most successful artists are conservatives. Most businessmen have cultural lives - and businesses cannot compete unless they have vibrant cultures with cooperative and highly creative elements. In fact in my life I have found far more meaningful culture in the workplace than I have in the theatre.

I love the theatre, art, opera, music of all kinds, writing - both watching and performing myself. It's time that the left wing intellectuals packed up their misplaced snobbery. Really it's laughable. Scruton is talking highly-paid nonsense. The Left speaks the the culture of organised jealousy. There's no point in engaging with it. Just move on.

Labour's Frightened Little Mouse

2007-07-05T14:22:00.001-07:00

Brown is Prime Minister for a week, and it's immediately obvious he has no leadership qualities. Labour have backed a lemon - out of cowardice. Blair told them to take a risk and push forward some candidates, but Jack Straw decided it wasn't worth it having Brown's knife in his back for five years or more. The truth is Blair should have sacked Brown a long while ago. It is Blair's cowardice that has put Labour in this mess.

Maybe Blair secretly will be delighted for everyone to see now what a hopeless frightened little man Gordon Brown really is. He's had Gordon's knife in his back for 14 years - and he's used this narrative as a news blanket all through his Premiership to cover up all his failures. It's fooled everyone from Rupert Murdoch who's been praising Gordon Brown's intellect for year after year despite the lack of any evidence, to most political commentators who imagined a strongman - a Stalin - not a frightyened little mouse.

The truth is Brown is nothing without Blair. Blair tried to tell them, but they weren't listening. There must be some pleasure for Blair now in seeing Brown hang himself in the Commons. We thought Ming was a lemon. Even Ming looks good now!!!

Golf Course Ghost Makes Us Twitch

2007-07-05T00:59:00.001-07:00

A friend of mine who teaches at Shrewsbury School recently joined Church Stretton Golf Club positioned on the edge of the South Shropshire hills. We had played there occasionally on and off for about five years. It is one of the most beautiful golf courses in the world and costs about £10 a round, which by British standards is very reasonable. When I'm over in Asia in the winter months, and I think of home I always imagine the Chruch Stretton golf course. Up on the top exposed to all weathers, often strong winds and driving rain, it feels like you have entered another world.

Talk in the Club House confirms that it is not only the extraordinary views that are special. You stand over the Shropshire plain looking out along at a row of hills, starting with Caer Caradoc - the fort of Charactacus, the chieftan who fought the invading Romans before they completed their conquest, and ending with the Wrekin - named after Uricon, the garrison City of 60,000 inhabitants which the Romans built nearby, today with only a few ruins visible, mostly under the turf.

The golf club is around a century old, and even though I've played on many beautiful golf courses in Thailand, the Philippinesand the Seychelles on Praslin Island, Church Stretton is in many ways the best. Golf played over hills is always more exciting than on the flat, but usually hillside courses have too many short holes, and don't stretch you. I can tell you now though, Church Stretton is anything but dull.

There are other things that are different about Church Stretton golf club. You will hear as you rest up in the Club House the story of the ghost. The locals say that they don't ever see him or her, but as they drive the hole at the very top of the round, the 13th,they see their ball land on the fairway 250 yards or so away (it is a downhill start to the hole). But as they get a bit closer and look around, they can't find their ball. It is gone. They say there is a ghost who takes away the balls - and that it only ever happens on the 13th.

It seems quite a spooky tale, and to be honest we thought it was a bit of a joke, another Loch Ness monster yarn to boost the takings. That was until yesterday, the 4th July 2007 . Three of us, the usual team set off at around 3.30, taking a risk on the weather, as there was a fair bit of rain around. The flag on the 1st was beating in the gale. We thought we would try the first 3 holes and if it was too terrible, we would stop there.

But as we went up higher up, we found ourselves in the lea of the hill. The wind dropped a bit, and we were only hit by the occasional shower. Umbrellas are useless in these conditions. In a strong wind they become like a sail and pull or push you where you didn't want to go. There was no one else foolish enough to go out, and in this very fresh air, battered and occasionally soaked, we kept going. The wind blew strongly between storms so even though we were getting soaked in the squalls, the wind dried off our clothes.

The golf scores on windy days can get quite ragged, and if you par a hole you feel pretty good. When the wind is behind you, your normal drive of say 200 yards can suddenly become 250 yards, or more if it's downhill. That's the easy bit. To pitch a ball onto the green in a strong wind needs careful allowance to be made for the effect of the wind. A shot which would be pin high and in line can land twenty or more yards away from the target. Even with the wind behind, a par is a good hole in such conditions.

These thoughts were in our minds, and the subject of our happy chatter as we all three drove the 13th. I saw Dick's ball land right in the middle of the fairway a few yards from mine, about 250 yards away, driven across the wind. Tim went the long way round the dog leg, and landed on good ground too. That's where the fun started. We looked everywhere but Dick's ball was nowhere to be seen.

It was a real puzzle. After many years of playing golf in many different parts of the world, in all weathers, I had seen most things - an occasional hole in one, flooky shots, good and bad and funny, but not once had any of us seen a ball just disappear. We looked and looked but it really was nowhere to be seen. There were a few holes nosed out by nesting rabbits, but not properly started. I checked those even though I had seen the ball land past them. There had to be some rational explanation. But Dick was sure. This was the ghost of the 13th hole.

He took another ball from his bag, and decided to accept that his ball was lost, but refused to add the penalty points to his score. He struck the next ball and it landed beyond the green to the right, lifted up by a gust and deposited up the bank. And then we saw it. The ghost which had been talked about by the locals, which had haunted this golf course for the hundred years since it was constructed appeared right before our very eyes.

You would think that an apparition would strike fear into our hearts and we would run, turn grey overnight and vow never to go up Church Stretton again for the rest of our days. But it wasn't like that. I'd heard tales of Roman soldiers appearing in cellars in York marching in line. We'd had pictures flying around my parents' house when we were children. Most people imagine they've seen a ghost, but only a few have really seen one.

This ghost was clothed all in black, walked in a strutting relaxed manner and his head was continually bobbing up and down to look at the ground. He reached down and picked up Dick's second ball as we watched........ then curled up to the rocks carrying it in his brown-red beak. Realising this was more a case for Bill Oddie to investigate, I felt pleased that there really were no restless souls lost between worlds unhappily haunting the most beautiful golf course in the world.

http://www.churchstrettongolfclub.co.uk/history

Islam Must Modify To Succeed

2007-07-02T03:26:00.001-07:00

The Christian religion took nearly 1800 years from its beginnings to reach the Enlightenment, when it was reinterpreted to a human-centred concept, where happiness, contentment and fulfilment were seen as the focus of life, and individual life and opinion were respected. Prior to that people were executed by religious courts for blasphemy.

The Islamist extremists need to reinterpret their religion in a similar way. One way they can be persuaded to do that, is for them to see that when the Koran instructed them to kill non-believers and conquer their lands, the world was not multicultural and mixed together. Lands were either 100% Moslem or 100%% non-Moslem. the only way to spread the religion was by conquest, it seemed.

Today Moslems are allowed to come to Britain and the West and preach their religion, and mix together with non-Moslems. They do not need to kill non-believers to gain access. In fact doing so will damage their religion as the West is forced to take measures to defend itlelf by invading the Moslem lands where the aggression is controlled from. Their actions could be causing a loss of power to Moslem countries and damaging their religion, which is not what the Prophet intended.

Their aggression could eventually cause the Prophet to be rejected from western lands if they persist with killing non-believers. Why not focus on converting the west by peaceful means as the opportunity is there without the need to kill people? The situation was not forseeable so long ago, and the texts need to be reinterpreted for the modern world, if the religion is to thrive.

Gordon Brown Sucks

2007-07-01T02:26:00.001-07:00

Politicians will need to learn a little modesty. They are capable of starting wars as we know. But they are not capable of fighting them. Winning wars depends on another body of people completely - intelligence officers, electronic eavesdroppers, technicians of all sorts and specialities, soldiers, airmen and naval personnel.

All governments can do is ensure that these people are properly funded, and motivated, and honoured for their dedication.

As regards honour, Gordon Brown is so keen to claim all the credit for protecting the public that he is unlikely to have any of it spare for the people doing the actual intelligence work and fighting the actual wars. In fact in his way of thinking, they are servants in his power and control.

As regards money and equipping, I think we all know how pathetic Brown has been in funding the services that are fighting this war for him.

As for motivating people, Gordon Brown is boring and not inspiring. He will always use a hundred words where ten would do. It is his lack of self belief which is the problem. He didn't even have the courage to face an internal election within his own Party, let alone an external one.

Blair and Brown - Two Flawed Characters

2007-06-30T04:06:00.000-07:00

The two characters who have dominated British politics for over a decade were for a long time hard to fathom. But after the last year in particular, as the media have been unable to hide away their plots and coup attempts against each other any longer, the picture of what they are really like as people has become easier to read.

Gordon Brown has little or no self belief. See his original signature before he was coached. There was a ludicrously large G followed by almost an equally vast B, but 'rown' fell away into miniature insignificance.
Then think of his speech in Downing Street. Ludicrous repetition of the word 'Change' and a confidence that the programme he fronts up is for the good, but as soon as it was Gordon's moment to speak about himself, he fell away into a miniature frightened Gordon who could only promise to 'do his best', stumbling on his words like a small boy addressing his Headmaster after a severe telling off. It was instructive that he needed to rest his confidence on his old school motto. Deep down under his bluff middle aged exterior,Gordon has no more belief in himself now than he did then. He's still fighting that child-like battle for self-belief. He cannot win it - heaven only knows what traumas he must have suffered as a child - but the only way he can satisfy his craving is to get others to buckle to his superiority, and allow him to be in control so that he, not they, is giving out the pain.
Accordingly Brown surounds himself with servile ceatures who dare not speak until spoken to, who know that their position depends at all times on flattery, and deference to Gordon. Even dear old defecting Quentin Davies, who regularly slated Gordon Brown in an unusually personal way, seemed to know that his own need for recognition, now depended on handing Brown ludicrously over-generous praise for his past achievements. You are safe either if you believe Gordon Brown is a genius, or if you are good at pretending that you do. Celebrity in others is not to be acknowledged any more. There is now only one real celebrity. All others are poor imitations of the real thing.
The Queen he will bestow full respect to though, as she and he stand at the top of the hill. But EU meetings, other international organisations, heads of state, newspaper tycoons must all pay homage to the greatness of Gordon or feel the chill.
Blair was the exact opposite. He liked to rub along with Pop stars, Presidents, Popes, Comedians - in fact anyone other than the only celebrity who still stood one rank above him and Cherie, who his wife could not stand! The Queen steadfastly refused to call him Tony. It was 'Prime MInister' and 'Mrs Blair' to the end. Only she was able to stand clear of the sofaisation of all Blair's relationships.
He was so cocky that he felt he could walk round any opponent whenever he chose. He couldn't be arsed with delving into too much detail - just enough to be able to fend off questions, and no more. The hard longterm thinking had to be done by someone else. He liked informal environments where he could use his self confidence to see off any jibes and make others appear to be overly strident, serious or extreme. Even parliamentary Questions suited his style. As there is no time to go into detail, he could always paint a instant picture, which left the real story untold or sounding unlikely. The longtem didn't matter. Only the instant, the moment. If Blair could look good now, he could always look good and keep in control. He only dallied with today's situation and its perceptions. He knew that tomorrow everything would be different, and he could strike a different pose. He avoided anything too longterm most of the time. Obviously Iraq became a situation beyond his control, and somehow even though it was mostly a situation of his creation, he still managed to create distance between himself and the unfolding catastrophy.
His favourite ploy was positioning himself in the middle where he could play everyone else off - Mandelson against Brown, Campbell against Brown, Cherie against Brown. It worked for many years but Brown would never let go, and he wore down all these opponents that stood in his way. Finally Blair stood alone and Brown arranged the Watson coup attempt which manoevred Blair towards the exit. The Cash for Peerages investigation merely ensured Blair stuck to the terms of the deal this time.
Blair surrounded hmself with strong personalities, and let them run things around him - starting with Cherie, then Mandelson, Campbell, Brown and Prescott. For Blair everything ran around his image, which he loves more than life itself. Any tarnishing of it or criticism is so painful to him that he doesn't even see that he might have failed. His narcissistic tendencies endured to the end, when Parliament was suckered into performing the final act of the Blair soap opera, where he, for the very last time was the only focus - not his cause, but he himself. His image was all. He knew as he sat down that the game was finally up, and his choking voice showed that losing the golden position of power was breaking his heart.
The legacy of his years will be debated forever. But 'wasted opportunity' will be one phrase that will be heard over and over again. Blair liked to leave all the thinking to others - Iraq was decided by Bush. he went along with that. The EU programme was worked out by Brussels and Merkel. He went along with that. Even the Irish peace process which he is claiming as his legacy, was started by Major. Blair's only real legacy was Blair himself - the iconic image that he created and loved.
Brown wants to be different. He is different. But his flawed character, his desperate lack of self belief renders him a weak leader of others. In as much as Blair's narcisiicism neutralised him as a successful Prime Minister, Brown's character and his similar inability to look at events as they really are, will be equally poor in results. These two flawed characters found themselves at the centre, both equally incapable of achieving anything other than satisfying the needs of their defective personalities by clinging to power. We've suffered the first. Now we'll have to endure the second.

Why Do Conservatives Fear A Nick Clegg Coup?

2007-06-29T15:43:00.000-07:00

As Gordon Brown recruits Lib Dem advisers into his team, many fear that he will split away the left wing of the Lib Dem party and the right will fall to a Nick Clegg coup. They would then compete directly for Conservative votes. Would that be such a bad thing?

If there were two Conservative Parties instead of two Labour Parties, we could be the ones to make electoral pacts and target Labour in combination, rather than facing a double enemy. Lib Dems have always obliged Labour in this way, especially noticeable in 2001 but also to some extent in 2005.

It need not be all doom and gloom. Cameron has prepared the ground by adopting many Lib Dem policies that fit with Conservative ideals. Courage, Mes Braves!!

Conservatives - The Far Too Nace Party

2007-06-29T09:37:00.000-07:00

Cameron's light touch, intelligence and gentility are his strength but also his weakness. He need a foil - not as in Osborne and Hague, as they too are the same type.
Blair was airy and light touch but he was surrounded with strong henchmen - Mandelson, Brown, Cherie!, Campbell, Prescott.

You cannot have Camerons surrounded by more and more of the same type.

If Cameron is Blair, where are the Mandelsons, Campbells, Browns, Prescotts? The fighters and detail people.

There are people in Conservative ranks who can put beef in the Cameron sandwich. But they have been marginalised by the modernisation programme.

As this is a turning point, and Cameron sees the need for the 'and theory', he needs people who can deliver that strategy. That won't be done by the same nice friendly enthusiastic bunch. Cameron needs an eccentric or two alongside his own excellent professionalism...not more and more the same which smells of weakness, and can become a boring diet.

John Hayes is my recommendation for Party Chairman with these thoughts in mind. The quilt should be patchwork not monocultural. The problem was at one time being seen as the 'nasty' party . Now it's the far too nace party. It needs to be more real.

Gentle Cameron Needs A Foil

2007-06-29T08:53:00.001-07:00

People moan about lack of policy content. Cameron is ridiculed by Piers Morgan on Question Time for it last night. Time to put some meat into the Cameron sandwich - John Hayes would be suitable...and would reset the tone to a more serious level.

The froth and spin of the A List period was ideal to face Blair - but not to face Brown, and his continuing attempt to slide the Constitution through and break us up into regions without democratic reference.

We have our more serious members who have strategic ability at grass roots level which you need as we are moving towards an election footing. John Hayes would reset the tone, just as required. We don't just need an Iain Dale pleasing reshuffle. The game's moved on from the light touch of the Blair era, where spin outplayed content. Great clunking fists don't even notice intelligence and gentility. Hayes has those but also a tougher and determined side - equal to the measure of the Brown fist.

The light touch of Cameron needs a foil. Osborne is light touch. So is Hague. Hayes is a different flavour. He'd be the ideal next Chairman of the Conservative Party.

Inflation Is Gordon Brown's Achilles Heel

2007-06-28T15:14:00.001-07:00

For a view that thinks US inflation is actually 10%, and not 2.5% which it is according to government statistsics -
see this webiste which publishes 'shadow' statistics.

http://www.shadowstats.com/cgi-bin/sgs/data

The inflation in the euro area has been around 15% since launch with the euro's value more than halving. This has been reported as 2-3% inflation by the ECB. Asset price inflation is running away with itself across the eurozone, but Trichet is desperately trying to stop the currency rising. It is laughable that they still pretend they are in control.

In the UK also inflation has been much higher than claimed. They can lie about infaltion, but not about interest rates. Those are now heading North - which kind of proves that the CPI inflation rates are a fabrication created by Gordon Brown to hide the truth.

He instructed the Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee to observe only the CPI (Consumer Price Index which excludes cost of housing and taxes), and ignore the more traditional RPI (Retail Price Index). Brown cannot pretend it's nothing to do with him...but of course he will.

Cameron should open up on Brown on this area. Brown is highly vulnerable. He's lost control of inflation, depsite avoiding the Euro and he should pay a political price for having done so.

Why Brown Is Turning Off Labour Voters?

2007-06-26T02:41:00.001-07:00

On labour blogs they are spitting about the Ashdown thing, and the dumping of trades unions from policy input. Brown obviously thinks he will reaise funds elsewhere now. Many labour supporters are furious also about the Constitution stitch-up, especially as Brown’s intervention was to protect ‘free undistorted competition’.

You will be feeling shocked if you believed Gordon Brown was a ‘Labour’ leader, more to the left than Blair and more eurosceptic as he’s kind of pretended all these years. He’s turning into a stronger version of NuLab than Tony was.
It’s enough to make you stay at home

America Needs To Play Catch-Up

2007-06-25T10:18:00.001-07:00

Tapestry, I think you have been given incorrect information about the US. Fox News in the United States is a right of center news channel, and is generally hostile to Europe; dismantling Fox will be a victory for Brussels, not Euroskeptics (the American spelling of that word looks ugly, I'll admit).
Also, as far as Ireland is concerned, it's generally pro-EU policy and shameful diplomatic past doesn't provide much hope that it will be the savior you imagine. JF On Conservativehome
MY REPLY
JF, I'm aware of the Fox standpoint. Murdoch is a sly old fox himself. He can run separate strategies in different places in his organisation. In fact he has to do so to disguise his strategies.
He will allow his newspapers to run powerful anti-EU stories, but he will go out of his way to keep the people, who ensure the EU keeps coming, in power, as that is all that matters in the end of the day.
Because he writes anti-EU, people are confused into thinking he has an anti-EU strategy. There is plenty enough evidence that this is a cover-up, and he has made all his progress in monopolising sport TV and holding onto monopolistic media positions by ensuring the various treaties get signed, and their protagonists such as Brown survive in power.
In the US, he will be thought of as a eurosceptic too, but that is where you would be wrong again. For evidence on this read Lance Price - The Spin Doctor;s Diary, who worked for Blair in 10 Downing St. Blair had agreed not to alter his EU policy on any matter without clearing it first with Murdoch.
Leon Brittan, ex-EU Commissioner is quoted this weekend as saying that Blair took more trouble to negotiate so that Rupert Murdoch's privileges could survive, than he bothered to protect Britain's economy. And Leon's a europhile!
The Murdoch position is sufficient to deceive most people in washington, and most people in Britain. If the USA wants to stop the EU Constitution, they must exert leverage on Murdoch one way or another - although it might be a bit late. But that's who controls the allocation of psoition amond=gst British politicans. So far Parliament has always caved in to his pressure.
Maybe this time, MPs will stand and fight for their survival, but it will help a lot if Murdoch is neutralised. America's intervention will be essential to achieve this.
Posted by: tapestry | June 25, 2007 at 05:59 PM

Wakey Wakey America

2007-06-25T07:35:00.001-07:00

America might be a little bit more alert about the Constitution Treaty than they were at the time of the Nice Treaty in 2001. Pre 9/11 America had no idea or interest outside its borders. Europe was only of mild interest as a holiday destination.

Now it is the greatest potential threat to the stability of America's world, not just because Europe harbours terrorists that desire America harm. The EU itself, en bloc would set itself in competition with the USA as its number 1 objective. Judging by US channel news reports, they are at last awake to the threat.

They could start work in Ireland and encourage the Irish to remember the ancient loyalties between Ireland and America, and persuade the Irish to reject the Treaty.

Failing that, they could strong arm Rupert Murdoch and threaten him with the loss of his precious FIX, sorry FOX TV. Murdoch is subject to EU competition laws and acts as the main manipulator of EU power in Britain to ensure they leave him alone to make billions from TV sport - never mind the headlines in The Sun.

Murdoch backed Blair all the way, and he's backing Brown now. The USA must surely realise that they need to twist Murdoch's arm up his back harder than the EU is doing if they want the Constitution buried.

Other than that, once the EU acquires the statehood it desires, the USA might as well accept that there is trouble ahead, and it will have to fall into line behind Brussels, and face humiliation.

I am sure America is not sleeping this time, and she will fight to stop Merkel and Sarkozy. It's not too late, just nearly too late.

Ken Clarke Must Wait Outside Headmaster's Study

2007-06-24T23:29:00.001-07:00

The media is in full cry trying to slide the EU Constitution past the noses of the people, and puff up Gordon Brown, the man selected to perform their final act of treachery. Which names would you expect to be at the forefront - Portillo? yes. Ken Clarke? yes.

The Portillo critique is pantomime, straight from Bruce Forsyth's The Generation Game. 'Modernise more, modernise more - not that much.' Portillo's starting to look and sound dated, which is quite comical for a professed moderniser. It would be nice to take him seriously, but who does?

Ken Clarke's brilliance is combined with his usual appalling inattention to detail. He needs a damned good thrashing. He'd look perfect in 1930's school cap, short trousers and a blazer wouldn't he, combined with cheeky grin. 'Just William' springs to mind.

If these two jokers are the worst the media can find to throw at us, then we can get straight back to the serious business. Hague's impressing me no end.

Cameron should let the media do their worst, not rush out and lower himself to responding to such nonsense. He will pick his moment, once all the Brown ballyhoo starts to tire. Knowing Gordon Brown, he won't have long to wait.

Posted by: Tapestry | June 24, 2007 at 11:35

I Predicted Harman When She Was 10/1

2007-06-24T14:12:00.001-07:00

MY POST ON JUNE 15th On Politicalbetting.com - How secure is the postal voting system being used? If it’s anything like the general election system, there will be plenty of opportunity for someone to rig the process to bring the ‘required’ result.

What would Broon’s desired result be? Hilary Benn possibly. No possible threat to Broon as a future leader, and another one who’s keen to hand billions over to African dictators like Broon himself. Johnson’s not going to be Broon’s choice as he might become a threat and he’s known to be Blairite. The other possible winner in a rigged vote would be Harriet Harman. Broon would not feel threatened by her, and he’d look good having a woman alongside. Ignoring the genuine voting, and imagining that the whole thing’s going to rigged anyway, it looks like Harman.

by Tapestry June 15th, 2007 at 10:25 am on Politicalbetting

and now she's won the Labour party Deputy Leadership on a wafer thin victory. It’s a classic fiddled election result like France’s referendum on the Euro. How many elections across Eurpe now smell of fixing? Sarkozy? Merkel especially? apparently by one seat. Funny how the most pro-Euro ones win every time. Europe is a post-democracy, a pseudo-democracy - run and controlled through the media - a mediocracy.

Brown On The Politics Show

2007-06-24T13:14:00.001-07:00

Brown on The Politics Show - earlier today

Q. Are you going to have a deputy prime minister?

A. That's up to me.

Q. The Deputy Leadership Contest looked like a leap to the left.

A. All must support the manifesto of our party...we must honour our manifesto.

No comeback from interviewer that a referendum was promised in the Labour Party manifesto.

Q. Europe?

A. I've read the detail from Brussels. All our 4 red lines have been achieved. In these areas we are properly protected as a country.

Q. will there be a referendum?

A. because we've achieved all 4 red lines, the public would not expect a referendum.

Q. Hague says you have no mandate to agree the Treaty.

A. He would say that wouldn't he. The effects people are claiming are not true.

Q. Qualified Majority Voting.

A. We've asked for QMV in certain areas. It's not a constitution. It's an amending treaty. Our negotiations have been successful.
We've met our red line negotiating objectives.

Q. will Blair become Bush's middle east envoy?

A. lots of words meaning YES.

Q. how will you personally change in the way you deal with your colleagues.

A. you have to bring people together. you have to reach out, build a shared sense of national purpose. education. science. innovation. build a national consensus.

GORDON, 85% of your people want a referendum on the Constitution. A majority of MPs want one. How will you achieve national consensus from the 15% who don't care about Europe?

Doubts Grow About Constitution

2007-06-24T13:12:00.000-07:00

The Observer celebrates shrilly the Treaty with its headline on page 35 - Europe Finally Unites After Agreeing To Treaty.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2109970,00.html

In the third column, the tone of celebration is moderated by 'fears that Sarkozy had suceeded in diluting the EU's historic commitment to an unfettered free market. Alarm bells rang..in the British delegation when it emerged that Merkelhad agreed to drop the EU's 50 year commitment to promoting 'undistorted competition'.

Lord Brittan said,'so much capital was devoted to supporting 'red lines' for the benefit of Rupert Murdoch that a substantial weakening of competition policy was slipped through that is damaging to Britain.'

This view from a previous EU Commissioner and Europhile is interesting. Lance Price wrote in his Spin Doctor's Diary that Rupert Murdoch effectively controlled Britain's relationship with the EU under Blair. This was not expanded on and seemed an almost incredible assertion. But here again in today's Observer we find the same implication - that Rupert Murdoch controls our negotiations with the EU.

Clearly Gordon Brown is going to allow Murdoch to dictate his European Policy. To achieve a democracy, Rupert Murdoch should be standing for election, not Gordon Brown. Britain is ruled secretly by a dictator who is protecting his media privileges - and the same privileges enable him to exert so much leverage over our political system that he can effectively control it. If you ever doubted this theory, we now have more evidence.

Cameron and Hague will be facing withering fire from Murdoch as they campaign for the referendum, and Brown will be praised to the rafters for pursuing his act of treachery to the politcal system that has promoted him to its pinnacle.

The Brown Terror Begins

2007-06-22T00:16:00.000-07:00

The gremlins are out in force on the web today. Probably trying to stifle comment at this sensitive time.

Cameron might do better to hold his fire rather than reshuffling his team to match Brown's early moves. The Conservatives are all wound up getting ready to play Brown. But he'll be hiding in his bunker 9 days out of 10, waiting for Cameron to make a move, or events to force his hand, which he will then respond to.

His own side will be in total confusion as to what he's up to, as he only ever gives out the minimum.

Cameron should play the new game and not carry on as if Blair were still there hoovering up all the limelight. With Brown as PM, limelight wil be going cheap.

It will be like hunting a bear that lives in a cave, which only comes out once every two weeks to give an awful terrifying roar, and then disappears again while the rest of the world wonders what it all meant.

If Cameron can provide a feeling of calm and continuity, that will tend to make people feel they would prefer that living at the mercy of an ursine roar. Less action and initiative, more meaning and reassurance will be at a premium during the Brown Terror.

King Gordon The First

2007-06-21T04:39:00.001-07:00

Those who run political parties are beginning to look for safety. Blair wants a shiny job in Brussels. Brown and Ming want to stop opposing each other.

They can all see that once the Constitreaty is signed, the game's over anyway so they might as well all hang up their weapons and get together for a nice easy run while Brussels takes over.

Do they need voters any more? Not really. They can orchestrate the outcomes they desire with the media alone.

Cameron's not playing to the corruption system. He doesn't quite fit in with the back-scratching ways. He won't attend EPP meetings. He missed Murdoch's annual bash. But he's no threat. With the LD's and Lab finally admitting publicly that they are in fact an anti-Tory alliance, the chances for Cameron are over.

Gordon could retire to Buckingham Palace. He might as well fire the Monarchy next.

The man Who Wants Blair 2B EU President - Pissed!!

2007-06-16T14:07:00.000-07:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uxb0JHqzlA

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2bc60e12-1b72-11dc-bc55-000b5df10621.html

Gordon Brown's Baby Boom

2007-06-15T01:40:00.000-07:00

The tax credit systems is deeply flawed as Frank Field explains, let alone the fact that it spews out incorrect £100's of millions which are not collectable back, and it is also subject to widespread fraud.

There are other effects.

Because Broon has volunteered government money (and I mean big money, not mere assistance but more like enough to live on) to pay for children (single parents working 16 hours a week get £487 after tax credits - an astonishing £30 an hour equivalent), there are far larger numbers of children being born.

The more children you have, the more money you get. The programme is ultimately self-defeating, as the pool of demand ('poverty') is growing rapidly.

My brother has six childtren. It was not worth both he and his wife working because of tax credits, so he's gone down to three days a week, and she's part time too. The country gets exactly what it pays for - more children and less work.

I'm single with no children myself. Because tax rates on taking money out from my company is now 63.8% (40% Income Tax plus 23.8% Nat Ins), I now live from rental income (taxed at 40%) and so I too am no longer working (pre-1997 you could take money from a company taxed at 40%).

Broon has pushed both my brother and myself out of work - me, by taxing so highly it's not worth it, and my brother because of supposedly 'eradicating child poverty'!

It's work that Brown's eradicating - not child poverty! All of this talk of hard working families is a joke. With Gordon paying for it all, they can put their feet up, and party.

Bob Woolmer - Another Not-Assassinated Person

2007-06-13T06:24:00.000-07:00

On the heels of Diana and David Kelly, another mysterious death will leave doubts lingering.

The BBC reports today,

'But deputy police commissioner Mark Shields told the BBC a later x-ray showed the bone was not broken. ' - why not the Police Commissioner himself? Doesn't he agree with the new version of what happened?

"I instructed my team... to go back and actually retrieve it from his body... We got it x-rayed and the fact is that the bone wasn't broken in the first place," he said. - what does the medical knowledge on this say? And are you sure it's the right bone?

Mr Woolmer's widow, Gill, welcomed the latest news, saying: "My sons and I are relieved to be officially informed that Bob died of natural causes and that no foul play is suspected in his death." Yes if you trust the new version. The first version seemed real enough. Do you think they didn't seek second opinions immediately before making such as erious announcement, threatening the whole wolrd cup?

But

Pakistan

's former captain Imran Khan said he was shocked there was no apology to the national side. all the political pressure could well have forced the Police to rethink their first and probably honest decision

He said

Pakistan

's cricket board should sue those responsible for the "humiliation that the
Pakistan

team went through".

"Bob Woolmer had diabetes, he had blood pressure, an enlarged heart, he had respiratory problems. On top of it, the depression of losing and then he drank a bottle of champagne. They should have first ruled out natural causes before this whole drama about the murder," Imran Khan said. so what actually killed him then Imran?

The BBC's Andy Gallacher in

Kingston

says this is an embarrassing U-turn for the Jamaican police.

He says the news conference was an attempt to shift the blame for the errors in the case onto the report of the original pathologist, Dr Ere Sheshiah. It's pretty certain that one person who won't be allowed to comment in public will be Dr Ere Sheshiah. The truth is no longer required, I doubt. The whole thing will be brushed under the carpet as quickly as they can

Britain Bored To Death

2007-06-10T03:39:00.001-07:00

Blair's signing the Constitution. Brown will ratify it through Parliament. Cameron won't say much. Goodbye Britain. It's over.

One of the freest and most creative cultures in the world is condemning itself to a grim and rather sad subjugation, a long slow and painful death. It's odd that a nation that used to fight wars to stay free, now throws it all away for no obvious reason, and certainly no positive reason. It's happening purely because the EU freezes our brains by creating a total lack of interest.

A whole country with a 1000 year history ceases to exist because of a lack of interest? The EU is so dull and lifeless that no one wants to know anything about it. If it sent tanks and aircraft and dropped bombs on us, people would react, but boring us to death is working far better. Brits cannot cope with boredom. We respond to humour, to music, to life, to argument, to sport, to animals, to film, theatre, books but not to bureaucracy. They couldn't outfight us, but it seems they can outbore us very easily indeed.

Our culture has one Achilles heel. We don't have any way to deal with really boring uninsiring unproductive slimy bastards who sit and say and do nothing. When the EU does produce any of its propaganda, it is so dull and uninspiring Brits yawn and look somewhere else.

Gordon Brown has seen how it works. He knows that all he has to do is to be as dull as it is possible to be, and he can do with Britain exactly as he likes. No one will trouble him.

People can focus on their obsessions - football, house prices, shopping, alcohol, drugs, sex and the rest but Gordon only has to be dull. The history of Britain ends this summer, along with its once vibrant political culture - the eptaph 'Bored To Death'.

50% Income Tax. labour Are Effing Thick.

2007-06-04T01:14:00.000-07:00

Pre-1997 I paid 40% tax on company bonuses. It was worth taking money out of my company, so I worked hard and expanded operations. It cost £100,000 to put £60,000 in my pocket.

Then came Gordon Brown, who added Nat Ins so tax is raised at around 63%. It has, since 1997 cost around £160,000 to put £60,000 in my pocket.

It is simply not worth putting money at risk when you keep 100% of your loss, and only have a beggar's portion if you win. Result - I stopped working and went overseas.

To buy UK assets, instead of earning money, I now borrow with no intention of paying back, except by reselling the asset. I have moved to living from rents and capital gains which are taxed variously, but with top rate at 40%, still acceptable.

It seems odd to me that the kind of investment that creates jobs, raises wealth levels, and makes the economy more productive is the most penalised by tax.

Britain has a problem. People must accept that those who raise the country's productivity and its wealth level have to be rewarded. Taking risks is not a job like a brain surgeon, or architect. You can stop doing it any time. I have, I regret to say. The reason is undoubtedly Gotdon Brown.

If they raise the rate to 50%, that will translate to 73% with nat Ins added on. So I would need to pay £220,000 to put £60,000 in my pocket. Do they think I'm mad?

I have paid far less tax since Gordon Brown starting raising taxes. In fact they keep sending investigators round to try to see where all their money has gine. They really don't have a clue. If the p[urpose of tax is to raise more money, they should cut the rate. BUt of course the purpose is not that at all. They want to flatten wealth levels.

They won't make me poorer. People like me just go - to where people want us, and allow us to be free. That's the main motivation in people running busionesses - to be free of all this crap, and people like Harriet Harman.

Cameron Should Dump Hague

2007-06-03T02:41:00.000-07:00

washing our dirty linnen in public is not totally a bad idea. people haven't seen an MP taking on a party leader and winning for decades. It's actually very interesting and refreshing.

Brady has seen what's obviously nonsense about the grammar school policy, and he has rightly made his stand on that.

But he hasn't seen how to place Cameron in a good position, or fend off potential enemies for him. It's good to give your opponent an escape route when you've beaten them - especially if that's your party leader. AFter all, who will be implementing any policy once it's all been thrashed out?

Cameron will have to accept that he's failed in his attempt at a 'Clause 4' with grammar game, and that education policy is becoming the business of the Parliamentary Party as a whole. In fact he's had a Clause 4 in reverse. He tried to ape the Blair system of controlling all policy from the top, with media support sewn up. People are sick of it. Cameron's experienced the opposite - the policy he was trying to ram through has unravelled before his eyes.

It's actually a credit to Cameron and the Conservatives that his MP's feel they can speak out without being dstroyed as they would be inside Labour. Brady need not accuse Cameron so much while making his point. Cameron's an intelligent and sensitive persona, and while he's surrounded himself with a few ne'er do wells like William Hague, he is still a good leader. Cameron will ultimately build a better team, but he needs to go through a bit of fire to see that Hague isn't much use when it comes down to it.

Brady should congratulate Cameron on promoting so many new policy ideas in his Policy Review departments, or something, and present the COnservatives as the Party willing to discuss things, and look for the best solutions as a Party, and not allow a control freak to dominate all discussions. In a way, he could lead the process of stopping the media/control freakery of the Blair years and be more gracious. That would establish him as a major figure. Maybe he'll change his tune a bit, but all credit to him for putting up such a good fight and winning.

Now he needs to realise he's won, and give Cameron a route to move forward.

Hilary Benn To Hold Gordon's hand

2007-05-27T23:11:00.001-07:00

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=592172007 reports Hilary Benn claiming EU concerns over Gordon Brown not being supportive are wrong. Seems like Benn is acting as spokesman/apologist for Brown.

They'd make a good pair - the silent brooder, and the skilled communicator, both keen of raiding the pockets of the rich to donate to the world's poor. Tories, take cover as Benn shoots into the lead on betting for Deputy Leader.

2006-12-21T18:41:00.001-08:00

according to the Guardian poll of voting intentions, g\Greens come more from labour than Conservative, and UKIP comes more from Conservative than Labour.

If we stem any haemorrage to UKIP (How do you spell that word?), a Green party surge would hurt Labour more than us, and the growth of the minor parties need not harm us.

Is that why John Redwood and IDS have been brought out of the shadows recently - to address the anger generated by the Polly Toynbee play, and the lift provided to Nigel Farage? It would be quite a coincidence if it were not.

To FM, why are so many selections on the A List bringing in Europhiles? Isn't the story of Bromley that Conservatives will no longer vote for Europhiles? Is Francis Maude manilpulating the A Lists to bring in the maximum number of europhiles that he can - and is that why Bernard jenkin was sacked from making the slections - the only eurosceptic amongst the selection panel?

Cameron And The End Of The EU

2006-12-20T16:34:00.001-08:00

Report on Conservativehome suggests that Cameron has persuaded the Barclay Brothers, owners of The Telegraph to provide him and the Conservatives with solid editorial support.
Cameron seems able to swing people behind him when he meets them face to face. That's a great skill. He appears to be offering nothing in terms of favours in return for support as he wins backers in the media and elsewhere.

Blair managed to get all behing him but only by agreeing to everything his targets requested. To the EU he promised the Euro. To Bush he promised unconditional support for the Iraq War. To others he promised all kinds of things most of which he failed to deliver - e.g PR to Paddy Ashdown.

Being tradeable for favours, in particular made Blair the all time favourite for Rupert Murdoch. According to Lance Price, Murdoch has more or less controlled Britain's relations with the EU 'under' Blair.

It is pleasing that Murdoch is finding Cameron less of a sucker, and Murdoch is having to learn respect for Cameron, even if that means he is taking the occasional pot shot at him to see if he can bowl him over. Murdoch must be beginning to realise that taking pot shots at Cameron could soon become a highly counterproductive strategy in terms of hanging on to all his media/sports privileges.

The EU is the fountain of power in Murdoch's mindset, and he imagines that if he keeps the EU sweet, all will flow for him in the UK. But with Turkey's accession now stalled, Italy's ability to remain within the eurozone in doubt, and France/Germany talking of consolidating a central EU bloc, allowing others to choose how far they want to be 'in' the game is opening up a new era of Europe a la carte.
(See Roger Helmer on Segolene Royal's proposals about the EU - http://www.rogerhelmer.com/straighttalk58.asp)

Power could swing quickly back to Westminster under a new Conservatiove government with the EU reaching a period of less certainty as to how to stabilise let alone progress.

Murdoch has seen the light about Gordon Brown. Only Paul Dacre is getting that one completely wrong still. He will have to retract on that front or look pretty foolish before long, with the Brown/EU era of big government/centralisation about to crack, and power about to swing back the other way. Cameron is the vanguard.

Belgian TV Warns Of Civil War

2006-12-14T06:46:00.000-08:00

Belgium thought that Belgium was finished yesterday. The RTBS1 main French language channel broke the programme in progress to announce that a coup d'etat had occurred, the king had left the country for his safety with the army, and the Flemish had taken over the country.

People panicked. 5000 people called the TV Channel and everyone called each other on their mobile phones.

After 40 minutes, RTBS1 then admitted that it was only a fiction, and that they had done it because they wanted people to realise how dangerous the Flemish separatist movement was becoming, and they wanted people to discuss how horrific it would be if the country split.

The Flemish need the water and the electricity from the French side, but they are sick of the foreigners in Brussels and elsewhere engaging in so much crime.

Today, now people realise the programme was a 'hoax', it's all calm again, and people are relieved. But yesterday they had a powerful shock.

The Flemish separatists are growing in power, insulting the Royal family at every opportunity. People compare them to the Nazis as they have a powerful far right politcal base.

The TV 'hoax' was an attempt to stop the advance of the Flemish breakaway movement.

It was meant to be a warning of what could happen...and an attempt to demonstrate the importance of the EU to Belgium. But disorder and crime in Belgium is out of control. Mirrroing the progress of the BNP in Britain, it is the collapse of civilised standards in society that is driving the collapse of the previous political consensus.

The Human Rights Laws that underlie the EU are the cause of the problem. It is no good just suppressing the growing anger in law-abiding communities. One day it will explode, as the TV hoax tried to show. It is essential that fear and punishment is reintroduced into the criminal justice system. The EU is not the cure but the cause of the problem.

Has Cameron Pulled Murdoch?

2006-12-13T08:34:00.000-08:00

The political geography is moving this week. First Rupert Murdoch, who's been sycophantically supportive of Gordon Brown for a long while, openly criticised him in the Sun and the ST last weekend.

political betting

That gave a clue that someone must have done a deal with Murdoch to replace Brown as the man most likely to ....keep Murdoch in possession of his privileged media and sports market positions.

also telegraph

and times

And yet there was no indication in the ST as to which direction Murdoch's support might be swinging.

Later on in the week, another significant event has happened - the opening up of Cameron's pitch to the Right.

conservativehome

Quite noticeably David Cameron has opened up operations on the right flank after denying that this would be necessary only a year ago.

The question in my mind is whether Cameron feels safe to move right because he knows that he will be getting enough media support. So far Murdoch has not been favourable to Cameron, saying he didn't think 'much' about him. Cameron has not been willing to brown nose the EU, and that has been enough to keep Murdoch onside with Brown.

Do the above movements of the political tectonic plates indicate anything?

The EU seems to be splitting. Royal is talking of an 'a la carte' Europe where France and Germany press ahead with the Constitution and others can choose if they want to join or not. The accession of Turkey looks increasingly doubtful, as well as further expansion of the EU. Italy is on the verge of breaking out of the Euro. Are the pressures holding the EU in place at last starting to unravel?

Is Murdoch starting to look beyond the EU as the principle power source that controls his affairs in Britain? If he is starting to think 'beyond the EU' that would explain why he's thinking of dumping Gordon Brown, and could also indicate that he will be backing David Cameron before too long.

There might be other explanations than this for what we are seeing this week, but my mind cannot yet create any other likelier scenarios.

Toynbee Impoverishes Millions

2006-12-12T10:02:00.001-08:00

Give people a start in life and some will grab the opportunity and build from there. Others will take what's on offer and then sit around waiting for the next handout.

In fact, in Britain, about 80% are the latter. Only 20% become the former and get going.

The 80% tend to vote left wing. The 20% right.

The deprivation of the 80% these days is not material. It is mental. The ones who help themselevs and their families feel a strong sense of purpose and self worth. Those who cannot get themselves started as it is made too easy to get by, suffer from low self worth, and no sense of purpose.

The mistake of the left is to focus 100% on money. Toynbee deprives the very people she claims to help. Millions are being needlessly supported by the state. If that support hadn't been there, they would have had to get going with helping themselves out of necessity. Most would have discovered a wonderful thing that no one thinks about these days - a feeling of self-respect. Toynbee is depriving millions of psychological and social fulfilment. That is the greatest of all poverties - never to feel good about yourself.

Prescott Will Outlive Blair

2006-12-12T02:18:00.001-08:00

Prescott is untouchable. He fucks up. No consequences. His story is yet to be told. He’s the shadow Prime Minister of Britain. Blair and Brown are a cover for what’s really going on.

Prescott’s running the Civil Service preparing it for takeover from Brussels, all on the quiet. The shadow organization which trains Civil Servants with the coming government of Britain from Brussels is called ‘Common Purpose’.

Britain is a pseudo-democracy where Prescott is the unmoveable EU Gauleiter who cannot be evicted from office. He will outlive Blair, no worries.

Trad Tories, Steady Your Nerves, Lads!

2006-12-12T01:25:00.000-08:00

Toynbee play from Cameron makes him ever more popular - while traditional Tories who don’t realise it’s all a PR game go off in a huff and say they intend to vote UKIP.

It’s not Cameron who needs a Plan B. He’s doing very well. It’s Conservatives who want more traditional policies. They would do better to deselect europhile candidates and MP’s within the Conservative Party than run off to UKIP wastelands. Cameron has shown himself willing to challenge the Europhiles but he will need 100% support from the trads to take them on. If they run off to UKIP, they only delay the inevitable battle and help their enemies. Cameron should not ’sort’ the europhiles until he’s secured power. Any other strategy would be suicidal. Trad Tories should steady their nerve and stay with Cameron.

The Quiet Man Will Speak For A Century

2006-12-11T02:06:00.001-08:00

IDS was out of his depth as leader (we are told), but at that moment (2001) the Conservative Party was in danger of falling into europhile hands - whether the openly europhile Ken Clarke - or the cryptically europhile Portillo. We should be eternally grateful to IDS that he barred the way to Clarke and Portillo for over two crucial years from his election in 2001 until his assassination in October 2003. If he hadn't done that, the Party would have been finished.

IDS founded the Conservative Social Justice movement, and it was during his leadership that the Policy of Direct Democracy and Localism came to the fore. Cameron is son of IDS. It is thanks to IDS that we are still here. Was he a great leader?

He lead us through our time of greatest danger. Isn't that the key role of leadership? I rank him as one of the Party's greatest leaders, although apparently he was out of his depth. He was strong becasue he had unmoveable values and beliefs, while everyone else around him was tradeable for position. He will be seen as the crucial link between the Thatcher Conservative Party and the more 'modern' Party that comes along now. People are far more interested in values again now chastened by war experience and terrorism. In 2001 no one gave a toss. The good times rolled.

IDS crucially won and equally crucially held on just long enough to see off Ken Clarke and Portillo, and we now have a chance of winning power once more and rebuilding the damage done by NU Lab to our country. It will be IDS' achievement as much as anyone's when we do.

Cameron Will Get Britain Out Of The EU

2006-12-10T09:26:00.001-08:00

Cameron got the backing of the media to win the leadership by pretending to be the next Blair. He got the full backing of Alastair Campbell's media, which was no mean achievement. The media thought they'd bought the next EU-supporting cultural marxist, sending Liam Fox (who I supported) packing.

Trouble is that to keep the media behind him he's had to not talk about Europe - because if he did, he'd expose a truth which would shock the media writers that he now needs in order to win power.

So Ken Clarke's allowed to blather on about EU-yawn-making rubbish, and Hague's allowed to produce yet more EU-Hague EPP/MER/XXX fudge and write barmy pieces about we're all going to die if we don't stay in the EU.

Cameron is right. First he has had to win the leadership. Then he must win power. Doing that requires allowing some other half baked idiots like Clarke, Hagiue to continue in the team. Murdoch is against Cameron as Cameron is not brown-nosing the EU. He's got to get the Guardian/Observer/Express and as many other non-Murdoch titles if he can. And this sector likes all that Toynbee-tickling stuff.

UKIP will not help Britain get out of the EU. Cameron will.

Gordon Brown's A Lady In Waiting

2006-12-10T08:36:00.000-08:00

Why the surprise that Murdoch's Sunday Times is criticising Gordon Brown.. Brown has always been an incompetent jerk, kept in place purely because he made even Blair look half useful. With Blair going, why would Labour keep Brown on for heaven’s sake. Look at him. He’s completely wrecked after grubbing out his position for ten years against all other pretenders to Blair’s favour. He’s the top courtier sure, but that’ all he ever was - a courtier - and a pretty nasty one too.

Murdoch's EU Blind

2006-12-10T03:44:00.001-08:00

4 full pages of the Sunday Times are dedicated to the LItvinenko affair. Not one word mentions the fact that LItvinanko and Scaramella have both made significant revelations about KGB penetration into Italy and the EU. It is farcical.

To cap that, there is an article announcing a consumer boom in Germany with pictures of dancing girls smiling, taken from the chorus line in The Producers - a fantasy film/theatre about an intended flop becoming a sell-out. How appropriate! The EU is exactly the opposite. An intended success which has become a disaster. Germany's mini-boom is nothing but consumers buying all they can before VAT rises from 19 to 22%.

Italy is completely bust. France is on her economic knees.

But good old Rupert Murdoch whose business depends on the EU Competition Commissioner not dismantling his illegal TV and Sports monopolies, cannot see anything other than the EU as a success story, where the Commission is KGB-free, not corrupt, and where the economy is not a basket case. I never thought that Mel Brooks (in character) and Rupert Murdoch would end up in the same category - living in totally false reality.

At least Mel Brooks admits to his audience that it's all a bit of nonsense. Murdoch expects millions to read his rubbish and somehow be too polite to notice.

Scaramella Framed

2006-12-08T08:27:00.001-08:00

THE SUN SAYS

Quote:
Felshtinsky said: “When I talked to Alexander around 12 November about who poisoned him, we were talking only about the Italian guy Mario. He was sure at this time that it was Mario. He was telling me that he was in a scheme.”

Yeah. Right. So all the news reports last week blaming the Russians are now out of date. Funny how quickly news tires these days. They are now stitching up Scaramella, as he's the other person the FSB and the EU want silenced.

Mario and Alexander produced a video together exposing all that Litvinenko knew. Now they say Mario kills Alexander. Seems like a good way to silence the two people brave enough to speak up about the KGB's penetration of the EU. First kill Litvinenko and then frame his partner. Tidy job.

Murdoch's being a good EU boy and going with the latest government narrative, which like all previous Litvinenko narratives does nothing to tell about Litvinenko's revelations. Playing around with the whodunnit aspects mesmerises the public, and nicely avoids the key issue - which is not who killed LItvinenko, but what did Litvinenko say - apart from Romano Prodi was the KGB's top agent in Italy and the EU, and that the KGB blew up all the tower blocks and not the Chechens.

MOSCOW LATEST - Reuters - MOSCOW (Reuters) - Dmitry Kovtun, a contact of poisoned Russian ex-spy Alexander Litvinenko, is suffering from acute radiation poisoning, Interfax news agency said on Friday, citing his medical notes. "Kovtun has been found to have an acute form of
Source: today.reuters.com

I know! Scaramella poisoned him too!!!!

Roger Helmer is Britain's Top MEP

2006-12-07T10:47:00.001-08:00

Roger Helmer is Britain most successful MEP at achieving publicity. See the analysis on.http://openeuropeblog.blogspot.com/2006/12/your-mep-hot-or-not_05.html

Mario Scaramella would like to send Roger all his best wishes and congratulations, and point out that the KGB are very well connected in the EU. Ever since Romano Prodi, Italy's top KGB agent was Head of the EU Commission, Russia has been happy to support the EU slogan - 'Ever Closer Soviet Union'.

It's really unkind of them to murder Litvinenko for revealing which Italian Left Wing politicians work for the KGB. And Scaramella is being given a jolly hard time of it too. The Italian Police have seized all his computers and documents to try to stem the flood of information coming out. They're wasting their time.

Roger Helmer knows where right and wrong lie, and nothing will silence his decade long campaign to get Britain out of the whole bloody mess. David Cameron's making speeches about withdrawing Britain from the Social Chapter, and the Common Agricultural Policy. Roger must tell him that in fact these are not EU projects at all but KGB operations to crush the European economy.

Less 'OK Yah' Please Cameron

2006-12-07T01:22:00.000-08:00

The troubles in the Constituencies show that many places like Chester are not buying Cameronism. This is the problem with letting Maude and the modernisers run the show in 100% Southern Public School accents. Cameron has to get more Northerners - or even Midlanders - running the Party. They don't see that the Polly Toynbee stuff is all just good play with little substnce. Cameron is right for the North. It's just that he has to wear Northern clothes as well as appeal in the South. David Davis could become more visible or Liam Fox. It's time the Portillistas were sidelined a bit. They are a small clique. It is divisive to the Party to give them so much clout. Let's hear some more regional accents up top, and less 'OK Yah'.

KGB in the EU - No Smoke Without Fire

2006-12-07T01:10:00.001-08:00

FROM ITALY - Police in Naples last night seized documents and computers from the home of Mario Scaramella, the self-styled Italian defence consultant who was with Litvinenko when he was poisoned, after prosecutors accused him of “illegally dumping waste”.
Mr Scaramella claims he has evidence that leading Italian left-wing politicians are agents of Moscow.

The fact is that Scaramella knows something that the Italian Police and the EU want kept secret. No doubt they are looking for copies of the film which Scaramella and Litvinenko produced together listing out what Litvinenko knew. Hopefully he has made multiple copies and they are spread far and wide. One day the public might find out what's going on with Romano Prodi and the KGB's penetration of the EU. But just from the smoke being emitted, you can see that there's a bloody great fire.

Tory PPC Signs Up As NEW BOOT

2006-12-06T15:51:00.000-08:00

THIS FROM UKIPHOME (which charges £2.50 to register so you cannot discuss free of charge as you can here!)

''From BOO (Better Off Out):
"Gordon Henderson, the Conservative Party Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Sittingbourne and Sheppey, has just become the first Conservative Party PPC to support the BETTER OFF OUT campaign (see his message below). This is very much to his credit, as we are unable to guarantee that UK Independence Party candidates will stand down against Conservative Party candidates at the next election - except in the case of those MPs who have signed up to BETTER OFF OUT.

Naturally, we will try to draw his position on British membership of the EU to the attention of the electorate in his constituency, so that voters may draw their own conclusions and vote accordingly.

It is apparent from Gordon's blog - that his support for freeing Britain from the EU runs deep, as he has written an excellent piece on there, "Time for a Referendum on Europe".

Good on Gordon, but I do hope that Nigel is true to his word and that UKIP stands in this seat as Gordon is not a sitting MP, and with Labour holding a majority of just 79 and UKIP polling 926 votes last time, there is always a chance for people to abuse BOO for political opportunism.

If you really want out of the EU, then you should be standing for a party that has that as a policy.

And before Iain Dale starts ranting that UKIP are "helping Labour", "blocking someone who wants out of the EU" etc, remember that the Tory Party are not going to offer EU withdrawal or a referendum as part of their next manifesto and nothing is going to change that, not 10, not 20, not even 50 new anti-EU Tory MP's, so what is the point in voting for them if you passionately support EU withdrawal?

If we followed Dale's logic then most Tory voters should switch to voting Labour as they offer much the same policy agenda and are clearly in the best position to deliver it.

Tip: The UKIP leaflets for this seat (and others) should clearly highlight that Cameron has banned any MP who supports EU withdrawal from his front bench team, therefore showing that a vote for an EU withdrawal Tory is a wasted vote as they can never deliver their aim.

IS UKIPHOME RIGHT ABOUT THIS?

If they are, then the idea of Better Off Out becomes redundant. It is clearly a good thing for getting Britain out of Europe if there are large numbers of MP's from all parties who have signed up for withdrawal.''

Within the Conservative Party, there is a long ongoing struggle between the majority who are eurosceptics eurosceptics with a small rump of europhile MP's. The europhiles have immediate back-up from the media and so hold more cards than they should. maggie was assassinated by europhiles in cooperation with the media, as was IDS. Cameron knows that you have to play the eurosceptic game differently. First win power. Then pass laws that challenge EU power. It's subtle tactic which will be cat and mouse all the way. The good thing is that Nigel Farage seems to have a lot more understanding of the strategic issues than any previous UKIP leader.

Scaramella Interviewed on British TV

2006-12-06T12:05:00.001-08:00

Scaramella was interviewed on Channel 4 news while lying in his hospital bed, speaking passably good English. 'Did you kill Livinenko?' they asked him. He looked bemused - genuinely.

There was still no questioning as to what he knows about Litvinenko's allegations - especially of KGB penetration into the EU. The media are presenting Scaramella as a figure of suspicion. There is much being done to discredit his record. There is no attempt being made to ask him about what he knows. I guess he's shocked by the amount of discrediting of him going on, and the murder of Litvinenko tends to stop him from splurging what he knows. The media should help and expose as much as they could get him to say. Once the information's out in the public domain, Scaramella would be much safer. The media are cowardly in not asking any penetrating questions from Scaramella, and in their tendency to treat him with suspicion.

The media have an agenda it appears - to protect the EU from damaging revelations. The easy way to do that is to descredit and not protect one of the few people brave enough to expose what is going on. The media are in reality a deceit - as they love to give the impression that they seek only the truth. In reality they are the ones ensuring the truth is never told.

Blair's and Brown's Past Is Catching Up With Them

2006-12-06T02:02:00.000-08:00

Rumours are circulating that Yates the Police Officer investigating the Loans For Peerages scandal, is getting close to interviewing Blair. If he cautions Blair, there will be a surge of interest. (See www.politicalbetting.com).

There is also a rumour that Blair's team is raising the stakes on Yates and will insist on multiple resignations in the Police Service if he is so cautioned and use the same determination to exact revenge as Blair and Campbell did over the Hutton enquiry. Is that a realistic scenario?

During Hutton and the Kelly affair, Blair forced the BBC's top brass into mass resignation after Gilligan exposed the sexed up dossier and publicised Kelly's opinions on Iraq. But NuLab at that time controlled the media tightly on a wing to wing uniform basis. Alastair Campbell was at the peak of his powers.

The media now are more split with some titles openly loyal to Gordon Brown, and therefore operating to some extent against Blair - Murdoch notably and the Daily mail under Paul Dacre.

Kelly was buried literally and not one voice came to his aid (Gilligan and the BBC were terrorised into silence and the war went ahead). Yates however, can function in relative freedom while he manoevres against Blair because Gordon Brown and his media support structure is in place. It’s a different era now. In 2003, Blair walked on water, rigged elections, sold peerages (for loans) and not a finger was laid upon him. The problem for Blair and maybe for Brown too is that their pasts are starting to catch up with them.

Yates is very safe if he works with Brown’s backing, and that way Gordon avoids being implemented by the Police in return.

If the Police go after Blair, he will no doubt go for a highly public defence as did Clinton, and he will no doubt ensure that any involvement from Gordon Brown is also given a good airing. That’s when the Es Aitch One Tee will hit the fan, and all these supposed ‘Deputy’ Prime Minister aspirants will spill out into the limelight.

Those putting big money onto Brown are running a much higher risk than they know.

Britain's New Dark Age

2006-12-06T01:10:00.001-08:00

The media are now trying hard to discredit Litvinenko - referring to his religious beliefs (Moslem) - and alleging he was involved with malpractice.

Quote:
Paolo Guzzanti has published the Italian text of an interview he recently conducted with his friend Mario Scaramella, who is currently under observation in a London hospital after being poisoned by polonium-210.

In the interview, Scaramella says the dose of polonium which was administered to him was six times the amount considered necessary in order to be fatal. He states that although he feels well, has no symptoms at present, and his life is not immediately at risk, the doctors have told him it will be at least 5 months before it is known precisely what future course his condition will take, and that even if he survives those 5 months, he will have to consider himself a cancer patient all his life, will have to submit to chemotherapy and avoid exposing himself to sunlight.

Of his recent revelations concerning figures in political life in Italy and Russia, Scaramella says (my translation):

“I can say that all my interviews with Litvinenko, whether related to the work of the Mitrokhin commission or quite extraneous to it took place in front of a television camera and in the presence of myself and Maxim, Alex’s brother, who did the interpreting. In these interviews, Alexander spoke Russian on a freewheeling basis and for many hours.

And why are these interviews coming out precisely now?

“For a very obvious reason: I believe that the United Kingdom investigators bust be able to have every useful element at their disposal in order to find our assassins. It’s clear that if Litvinenko was poisoned, and if I was posioned, that means something: you don’t need a Nobel prize to understand that someone has tried to close our mouths, and that would make a motive, don’t you think?”

Today a rumour has begun to circulate in the press that Litvinenko was probably a vulgar blackmailer. Comments?

“It’s obvious: the prospect of the publication of possible revelations immediately releases a campaign to destroy his credibility: if the man who up till yesterday was a victim and a martyr starts to talk, even when dead, he must at least have been a blackmailer.”

What else do you wish for?

“To have the time to nail down by the use of the truth alone all those who are killing us, whether physically or in terms of our image.”

It seems that in fact he was revealing the penetration of the KGB/FSB into EU countries and the EU Commission. The media is so tightly controlled in Britain that not one paper/TV station dares to go down the line of even thinking if Litvinenko's allegations might be true.

What a farce that liam Fox lectures Russia about its media bias. At least in Russia everyone knows the score. Putin's a murderous barbarian. Here though, they tell us the EU's a bed of roses. I prefer the smell of shit myself.

Trouble is every time I write what I think about the EU, they jam up my blog. It doesn't post or get hits. That's why I run so many blogs now to try to keep one step ahead.

I despised them before the Litvinenko murder, but now the control freaks who run Britain are seen for all they are - a cowardly bunch of assassin-tolerant crooks, who only care about keeping their shit kept hidden from public view. Blair has spawned the new dark Age of Britain, where whistleblowers get murdered and silenced without a murmur.

Scaramella Interview Missing From Tuesday's Papers

2006-12-04T15:28:00.000-08:00

Paolo Guzzanti has published the Italian text of an interview he recently conducted with his friend Mario Scaramella, who is currently under observation in a London hospital after being poisoned by polonium-210.

In the interview, Scaramella says the dose of polonium which was administered to him was six times the amount considered necessary in order to be fatal. He states that although he feels well, has no symptoms at present, and his life is not immediately at risk, the doctors have told him it will be at least 5 months before it is known precisely what future course his condition will take, and that even if he survives those 5 months, he will have to consider himself a cancer patient all his life, will have to submit to chemotherapy and avoid exposing himself to sunlight.

Of his recent revelations concerning figures in political life in Italy and Russia, Scaramella says (my translation):

“I can say that all my interviews with Litvinenko, whether related to the work of the Mitrokhin commission or quite extraneous to it took place in front of a television camera and in the presence of myself and Maxim, Alex’s brother, who did the interpreting. In these interviews, Alexander spoke Russian on a freewheeling basis and for many hours.

And why are these interviews coming out precisely now?

“For a very obvious reason: I believe that the United Kingdom investigators bust be able to have every useful element at their disposal in order to find our assassins. It’s clear that if Litvinenko was poisoned, and if I was posioned, that means something: you don’t need a Nobel prize to understand that someone has tried to close our mouths, and that would make a motive, don’t you think?”

Today a rumour has begun to circulate in the press that Litvinenko was probably a vulgar blackmailer. Comments?

“It’s obvious: the prospect of the publication of possible revelations immediately releases a campaign to destroy his credibility: if the man who up till yesterday was a victim and a martyr starts to talk, even when dead, he must at least have been a blackmailer.”

What else do you wish for?

“To have the time to nail down by the use of the truth alone all those who are killing us, whether physically or in terms of our image.”

Will The British Press run the story of Scaramella interview tomorrow? Unlikely. In the British media, Scaramella is becoming a non-person already, and Litvinanko's revelations are definitely not of interest.

Shit Happens - But Only In Russia

2006-12-04T07:50:00.000-08:00

What an inconvenience Mario Scaramella is turning out to be. If it wasn't for him, the whole Litvinenko murder could have played easily in the media as an all Russian affair. Russian poison. Russian multi-billionaires. Russian agents. Russian football team mysteriously beating Arsenal, and so on (3 easy chances missed somehow by Arsenal with their normally deadly strike rate).

That's all fine for the media, though - even rigged football matches. Because it fits the news narrative that the British government wants. The government sends detectives to Moscow. It searches BA jets that flew to Russia. They write and talk endlessly about the collapse in democractic standards in Russia and Russia alone All the documentary evidence - the list of bureaucrats, agents and operatives that Litvinenko showed to Scaramella has not only disappeared (so far as we are told), its whereabouts is not even mentioned - in the media.

I wonder why?

Could it be that it might have pointed to a long list of bureaucrats working for Russian interests, high up in the Italian government, and inside the EU Commission? Surely as Scaramella's job was to investigate the KGB's operations in Italy, that would be the information that he would be seeking from Litvinenko.

Litvinenko has spoken to Gerard Batten MEP about the penetration of the KGB into Italy and other European capitals. This is what we are being asked not to think about or imagine by the British media that cannot find any explanation as to why Litvinenko was meeting Mario Scaramella, an Italian - or mention one word that this affair involves any more than just Russia.

Expect more headlines and stories which run along these lines - Litvinenko, Russia, Kremlin, Putin, Poison, Russia. Expect nothing along these lines - Italy, EU, bureaucracy, corruption, murder, poison, treachery, Romano Prodi, The EU Commission, Italy.

The biggest laugh of my day was reading Liam Fox' s comments that Putin was angry with Blair for allowing Litvinenko's dying accusations against him to be published. Fox said that this showed that Putin had no understanding of a free press working in a democracy. Maybe Foxy hasn't noticed, but we are suffering from the same problem. We are being bombarded with a one-sided version of events purely to screen out the bit that matters - the fact that we are in the EU now up to our necks, and that the EU is heavily involved in espionage, corruption and anti-democratic practices. And the British media dares not even look at the situation.

We are living under a big lie in Britain. We are being asked to believe that the EU is a democratic and pure. At least the Russians have no illusions about Putin. They know he's a total shit. We are the mugs being conned and lied to, living in cloudcuckooland. That's the problem with the EU. It's just like the Eurovision song content. Shit never happens in the EU, apparently. Could that be because the whole thing's shit in the first place?

Gordon Brown Adds Jobs Destruction to Pension Wrecking

2006-12-02T12:17:00.001-08:00

I wrote a couple of weeks ago that the good thing about being sent to hell (as an employer by NuLab) was that at least things could not get any worse. I was wrong.

Today's Express notifies that Gordon Brown wants to remove the exemption for Privately Owned Businesses from Inheritance Tax, introduced by John Major.

Half of all jobs in the private sector, about 10 million in total are in privately owned businesses, so there goes another couple of million jobs - soon to be eliminated by Brown's wrecking of the private sector continuing apace.

How many businesses can afford to pay out 40% of their value just as the owner, often the founder passes away? Businesses are at their most vulnerable, and can take years to rebalance after the death of the owner. Good old Gordon Brown. He's found a way to turn a setback into a disaster - just as he did with pensions.

Our rate of IHT is the highest in the world at 40%. Brown has failed to keep the value of the tax up with asset inflation so that ordinary houses are now caught up in it. Many countries have eliminated inheritance tax completely or have low rates around 5% - but Gordon Brown is turning Britain into the most socialist ghetto in the world.

China and India are reforming their economies to liberate their private sectors to create hundreds of millions of jobs. Britain meanwhile languishes in an anti-business anti-employment timewarp.

All the efforts of millions of businessmen will now be going into tax avoidance - and not into expanding their businesses. Well done, Gordon Girls Blouse Brown. You've wrecked the rest of the British economy. What would your erstwhile hero Adam Smith have to say about this?

Cameron Loves The EU - Not

2006-12-02T11:43:00.001-08:00

Cameron's strategy is a media strategy.

The media objects to a politician talking about immigration or Europe. Portillo for example writes in the ST over and over that the Party must fight on the middle ground and only mention the main issues that concern the public - health and education.

Whether the public cares about immigration or not (of course it does) the media will attack any politician who campaigns on it.

Europe meanwhile only has to silence opposition to become a fact of life.

The BBC backs Europe. Murdoch backs Europe. The Mail backs Brown who backs Europe. The guardian/observer back europe. There is little media left after that.

Cameron is known not to be euro-enthusiastic which is why he gets slammed in the murdoch press. If he opened up on Brussels with all Tory guns blazing, he would be shot down in flames as was Thatcher, IDS before him.

He has to tread warily around the media. Not to mention Ken Clarke and William Hague, who is as keen on the EU as anyone, the charming old fool.

Listen To Litvinenko

2006-12-02T06:30:00.001-08:00

The Polonium checks out with Mario Scaramella.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6199464.stm

It seems that he too was an intended target of the Sushi Bar poisoning, but he ate nothing and only drank a bottle of water, so escaped the same fate as Litvinenko. Why was he also a target?

According to The TImes, he was involved in a 'Parliamentary investigation in Rome into KGB dirty tricks'. He and Litvienko were both knowledgeable about KGB penetration into the Italian government, and speaking about it.

The key fact not published anywhere in the UK media is Litvinenko's reveletaion that Romano Prodi was the KGB's top man in Italy. Given his time as head of the EU Commission it is safe to assume that the KGB are also active in penetrating the EU.

Are we now being governed directly by organised crime in cahoots with Russian security services? Given the way things are going in Britain, I'd believe anything.

The role of Italy in the Litvinenko murder has so far been ignored by British media. I guess they want to protect the EU from shocking revelations. Litvinenko will probably be rubbished now, and the big money will pay for his memory to be quickly erased.

Those interested in freedom and democracy should not allow his brave revelations to be so easily ignored. Litvinenko tried to warn us, and we should listen.

http://www.westbournemouthukip.com/Battenonprodi.html

http://www.ukip.org/ukip_news/gen12.php?t=1&id=2766

EU - Government By Organised Crime

2006-12-02T06:15:00.001-08:00

Scaramela, the Italian who lucnched with Litvinenko at the London Sushi Bar, was involved in a 'parliamentary investigation in Rome into KGB dirty tricks', (Times today).

It seems as if Scaramela was also an intended target, but he ate nothing at the Sushi Bar and only drank a bottle of water. That provided an assassin with little opportunity to get Scaramela in the same poisoning hit.

Many Italians had much to fear from Litvnenko and Scaramela, given the degree of KGB penetration into Italian government. Scaramela may yet live and talk some more.

Litvinenko has already revealed that Romano Prodi was the KGB's head man in Italy - so penetration of the EU by the KGB has to be likley also. No wonder the media are so keen to portray the Litvinenko murder as an entirely Russian affair.

Blair and the media machine must protect their Brussels overlords from having the ghastly reality revealed. The EU is not only penetrated by organised crime. It is organised crime.

'KGB Penetrate EU' Litvinenko

2006-12-01T08:52:00.001-08:00

The Polonium checks out with Mario Scaramella.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6199464.stm

For days it has been obvious that the Italians must have had a role in the murder of Litvinenko, and yet all media have been focused 100% on hiding the fact, and promoting the story that the Russians did it.

What have the Italians got to hide, and why are the British media protecting them? Litvinenko told us very simply that Romano Prodi was the head of the KGB/FSB in Italy. He was also head of the EU Commission at the time of the Nice Treaty.

Do the media feel uncomfortable that the EU is penetrated by the KGB?

http://www.westbournemouthukip.com/Battenonprodi.html

http://www.ukip.org/ukip_news/gen12.php?t=1&id=2766

The EU seems capable of murdering their opponents in mafiaesque manner, just as easily as the Russians. And yet dear old William Hague carries on treating the EU as if it was a Sunday afternoon picnic. The EU threatens our freedoms as well as our national identity and our economy. Not surprising really if it's penentrated by Russians worried by once successful Western economies leaving it behind.

Hague Pulverises Prescott - and Writes Rubbish.

2006-11-29T09:53:00.000-08:00

Reports from today's PMQ show Hague running rings around Prescott. As usual a good performance by hague is recieved with calls for him to become Party leader. I disagree.

Hague is a striker, maybe the best one in the team. But he'll never make a manager. Speaking talent and leadership quality should not be confused. Think of Kevin Keegan as a parallel. Great on the pitch, one of the best in his day, but not a leader from the touchline, so to speak. Hague's much the same.

For evidence see Hague's dreadful piece in the Sunday Telelgraph this week, giving appallingly weak arguments for eliminating nation states in favour of corrupt international bodies.

Support these bodies, was the title, or count the bodies. It was classic Bildeberg nonsense, the secret group that Hague is a longstanding member of.

Hague is a combination of brilliance as a communicator, and debater with pusillanimous strategic sense. Thank God for Cameron. Hague's ability makes him a danger to the Party. He can never see the wood from the trees.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/11/26/do2605.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2006/11/26/ixopinion.html

Will Conservatives Get Decimated At Euro Elections?

2006-11-28T12:09:00.000-08:00

Subtle pitch from Chris H-H to be elected as leader of the Conservative delegation to the EU Parliament today. Cameron loyalty on environment. Hague loyalty on Movement for European Reform. The real message is the need to push for the EPP exit.

The unspoken aspect to this is of course how well do Conservative MEP's think Farage will do as UKIP leader. If UKIP pull another blockbuster vote in 2009, some conservative MEP's can expect to be shifted out.

Surely it would be better to move allegiance over to Chris H-H and build a Conservative eurosceptic UKIP-proof platform, than plug on with Kirkhope and end up as casualties of Hague's fudge.

Chris H-H can afford to lead a rebellion against Kirkhope as he's alreday got one foot in the Conservative MEP lifeboat. It all depends on how big Conservative MEP's think the anti-Conservative UKIP vote will be with UKIP under Farage.

If I was a Conservative MEP interested in saving my skin, I'd back Chris H-H.

The last thing Cameron needs is a drubbing at the Euro elections in 2009, which he is in danger of incurring, what with Hague's fudge, and Farage's clarity. Cameron needs the eurosceptics to get control of the Conservative delegation to the EU Parliament.

Confused By Cameron. Why?

2006-11-26T00:29:00.000-08:00

Cameron is not pushing the Lib Dem agenda. He is appealing to Lib Dem voters, and ex-Lib Dem voters. As most ex-Labour voters (the largest growing sector of floaters) take a pit stop with the Lib Dems before moving on, Cameron is pitching at the largest target market available, and doing well with them.

His problem is the Conservative right wing which shudders at every PR success in the above campaign. On poverty Cameron hasn't gone left wing. He's actually reaffirmed Conservative thinking, and developed it by saying that The State has not the answers to poverty. But no one looks at what he's actually saying - only at the headlines. Of course he sounds left wing. That's the whole idea!

His other problem is the EU-backed Murdoch media. Like IDS and Thatcher before him, unless Cameron bows down to the EU, he'll get a kicking from the Murdoch quarter. The EU Competition Commissioner decides whether Murdoch can keep his media privileges or not. If Murdoch doesn't keep Cameron out of power, the EU might trade with another ambitious entrepreneur, and split away some Murdoch privileges. Will Richard Branson become the next one to prevent Britain escaping the clutches of Brussels?

If Cameron's own people realised why Murdoch was hunting Cameron - because he is alleged to be a europsceptic by those in the know (Ed Balls etc) - they would be very satisfied with his leadership. Meanwhile Farage thinks he's going to pick up lorry loads of Conservative votes. As usual he probably will at the Euro elections. At the GE, Conservatives will return to the fold despite their ruffled feathers.

Who Killed Litvinenko

2006-11-25T10:14:00.000-08:00

Police have been examining two meetings Mr Litvinenko had on 1 November - one at a London hotel with a former KGB agent and another man, and a rendezvous with Italian security consultant Mario Scaramella, at a sushi restaurant in London's West End.BBC WEBSITE

The Italian connection is interesting. Litvinenko was told while he was still working for the KGB that Italy's political class was heavily penetrated by the KGB and that the KGB's main agent in Italy was Romano Prodi.(The UKIP MEP Gerard Batten read out these allegations to the EU Parliament. A video from Channel 4 News can be found on the UKIP website. http://www.ukip.org/ukip_news/gen12.php?t=1&id=2749)

Prodi, now Italy's Prime Minister was previously Head of the EU Commission.

He was also involved in the Aldo Moro assassination. He informed Police of the whereabouts of Moro's corpse. When asked how he knew where it had been (the boot of a car), he said that he had received the information in a seance.

Clearly Putin has much to worry about with the investigation Litvinenko was making into the death of the murdered journalist. Putin's statement that there is no evidence of a violent death is obviously macabre and not exactly a balanced view. Putin has to be suspect number 1. But many Italian politicians must fear exposure too. Maybe it was a combined effort.

Gordon Brown Girl's Blouse

2006-11-11T11:01:00.001-08:00

DUE TO 'TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES' I'VE RELOCATED. TO www.tapestrytalks.typepad.com

I was back in hospital for three days finishing this evening and will be back again next week until Thursday. Growing up on a dairy farm in the 1950's and 1960's I was comtaminated by insecticide a Polychlorobenzene or PCB. This was used to kill flies and make the calf pens and cow house fly-free. The PCB killed flies by destroying their nervous systems. Of course it also does the same to humans, but a little slower. After fifty years I am showing symptoms of nervous system disorder as a result of a contamination from long ago.

The medical advances made recently are great and can do much to assist where my own nervous system is malfunctioning. Every year has had its problems following on from the original cause of trouble, but with any luck, I should be able to get the remains of the PCB out and rectify some of the damage. The hospital diagnoses which parts of the nervous system are damaged and works out what to do.

While hanging around, I asked the Sun-reading nurse last week what she thought of a few British politicans.

David Cameron? Not doing much.

Blair? She still likes him.

Gordon Brown? 'Girl's Blouse,' she said, ' a follower not a leader.' That's not the line taken in The Sun. She's worked it out for herself.

UKippers Must Remember Why UKIP exists.

2006-11-06T07:13:00.000-08:00

A whole branch of UKIP resigned as reported by ian Dale - TEXT

My comment was as follows -

For UKippers to join UKIP, they first need to form the view that the Conservatives are sold out to the EU, so that they can make the Conservatives into the enemy.

Once they've done that, and formed a black and white view of British politics, they then proceed to ensure less eurosceptics get elected to Parliament, and more europhiles do get elected, as any as 25 in 2005 (Booker).

In fact the Conservative Party is a coalition between a large majority of eurosceptics, and a tiny rump of europhiles. The ruophiles have a lot of clout as they can call on immediate media support to attack Cameron if he becomes too eurosceptic on any issue. That's why he allowed Hague to fudge the EPP.

The europhiles assassinated Thatcher and IDS. Any Conservative leader has to jump to their tune to some extent, as there is little choice. The problem is that too many of the activist eurosceptics have abandoned the Party, making it easier for the europhiles to get away with it.

If the efforts that go into keeping UKIP afloat would instead go into attacking europhiles, and running deselection campaigns against them, the results would be significant.

If the europhile rump of MP's was hounded out, Cameron could move to the eurosceptic side much more firmly than he can with Ken Clarke breathing down his neck, Hague fudging the EPP, and pushing the European Reform Movement. Hague should be outed as a false eurosceptic.

If UKIP stood in europhile seats only, it would do more to achieve its objectives, and less to harm them.

The dear folk writing their resignation letter above, have lost sight of what the aim is - to get Britain out of Europe. Who cares about being a Tory pressure group? Being UKIP's turned into a dead end, so they need a new strategy. It's time for Nigel Farage to rethink - and quickly - and he is doing. Or UKIP will lose the current opportunities to swing Cameron further round, never mind the Kilroy Silk thing which is ancient history.

Why are UKippers so slow to advance their thinking? They see themselves as the vanguard of Britain's freedom, but they are in danger of becoming the best allies Brussels has ever had. Dale is right. The Cameron leadership provides a great eurosceptic opportunity. Will Nigel Farage provide the leadership which ensures UKIP are pushing Britain towards the EU exit door? Or will he line up with the outdated UKIP strategy suited to Hague and the John Major era, and which the BBC and the europhiles know and love.

Tapestry Talks

2006-11-06T03:28:00.000-08:00

The Tap has been having bit trouble since posting against Murdoch and Gordon Brown. It might all be coincidence. But unable to post any more, I'm trying another blog. I've noticed some people call my blog Tapestry on their links so I've copied that but cannot get the name Tapestry. So I copied Dizzythinks to make Tapestrytalks. I know I'm writing but Tapestrywrites doesn't really sound very good!