EVERY British person needs to read this.

In 1972 we were told we were joining a trading agreement between member states of Europe. There were three main sticking points for the UK:

1.                  Our traditional bonds with the countries of the Commonwealth.

2.                  Refusal to join a customs union and wanted to maintain a free trade.

3.                  We were opposed to the long term aim of surrendering national sovereignty.

When the Heath Government was negotiating our entry, Edward Heath instructed Sir Con O’Neil, the UK’s chief negotiator, to ‘Swallow it whole and swallow it now!  In other words accept whatever conditions they offer. Membership was sealed when the UK joined in 1973.

Before entry, Edward Heath wrote to his Lord Chancellor, Lord Kilmuir, asking if there were any Constitutional limitations on joining the EEC? In his reply Lord Kilmuir stated: ‘I agree with you that there are important constitutional issues involved’. He went on to say: ‘I have no doubt that if we do sign the treaty, we shall suffer some loss of sovereignty’ and confirmed this by making these three points:

1.                  Parliament would be required to surrender some of its functions to the organs of the community.

2.                  The Crown would be called on to transfer part of its treaty-making power to those organs of the community.

3.                  Our courts of law would be sacrificed to some degree of independence by becoming subordinate in certain respects to the European Court of Justice.

In 1973, that Britain was joining a political union was deliberately withheld from the people.  They were knowingly and wilfully deceived and betrayed by Conservative leader Edward Heath.  He said that “There is no question of eroding any national sovereignty; there is no blueprint for a federal Europe. There are some in this country who fear that in going into Europe we shall in some way sacrifice independence and sovereignty. These fears, I need hardly say are completely unjustified.”

Thirty-seven years later in 2012 we see that this was a lie. Sir Edward Heath admitted as much in 1989 by remarking that ‘the project was always political.’

A Government White Paper on the EU Constitution, issued in September 2004, stated that: ‘The legal primacy of European law was accepted by Parliament when we joined the EEC’. Yet the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Geoffrey Rippon, moving the motion on the 15th February 1972, for the Bill which took us into the EEC, said: “there would be no essential surrender of sovereignty…”. This mantra, in one form or another, was repeated throughout the campaign and the debates in Parliament. So we see a Government White Paper attempting to bury the truth.

Joining the EEC (EU) was an act of outright treason against the people of this country.  Heath’s treachery was THE most grievous act of high treason in British history.

Our membership of the EU is therefore illegal as treason can have no effect in law and Heath’s government instantly rendered itself an unlawful assembly (having no effect in law or lawful ability to govern the country.

  

All subsequent Parliaments have also been unlawful assemblies as they failed to reverse Heath’s treachery.  Instead they committed further treason continuing the pretence of our membership and adding further commitments to the EU by signing additional treaties, ALL of them with no effect in law.  Treason is a capital offence and still carries the death penalty.

 We joined the EU (EEC) in 1972. After 38 years of pretence that we are part of it, we now know:

1.                   The European Union’s six constitutional treaties build a three-tier politburo dictatorship.

2.                   The EU has the laws of a police state – which are being increasingly enforced.

3.                   The EU’s 120,000 regulations will bring us a soviet style command economy and abject poverty.

4.                   Unelected EU dictators will control the nuclear weapons of former nations of Britain and France.

5.                   The EU’s illegal six treaties will compel us to hand over all our armed forces to the EU.

6.                   Our armed forces and police have been told they will swear a new oath to the EU, or be fired.

7.                   The EU’s 120,000 regulations will rigidly control our personal lives – more than any nation in history.

8.                   EU regulations now cost us £100 billion a year. (Better Regulation Commission annual report 2005)

9.                   When enforced, those illegal regulations will destroy most of our 4.5 million small businesses.

10.               Up to 13.5 million will be unemployed after EU regulations close small businesses.

11.               The 120,000 regulations WILL MAKE US SUBJECT TO CONTINUAL ARREST (SOCPA 2005).

12.               There are now 3,095 “Crimes against the EU state” on the British statute book.

13.               The EU’s Constitutional treaties replaced the British Constitution on 1st January 2009.

14.               The independent nation of Britain was finally abolished by the Lisbon Treaty on 1st Jan 2009.

15.               EU Bilderbergers control our parties: Ken Clarke, Maude, Cameron, Millibands, Mandelson, Clegg

16.               The EU’s Road Pricing and personal ID chips will inform the state of our exact location and activity 24 hours a day.

17.               Huge taxes/fines by the EU’s Road Pricing, Congestion Charging and global warming policies.

18.               The EU Regionalisation Plan will abolish England and our 48 counties in favour of 9 EU regions.

19.               The 9 EU regions will report direct to Brussels, not to Westminster, which will be defunct.

20.               The EU Regionalisation Plan will abolish our 19,579 councillors.

21.               British common law mainly replaced by EU corpus Juris by 1992. Government is now above the law.

22.               Police have shot 30 innocent people dead since 1992 and have not been successfully prosecuted.

23.               1,100 deaths in police custody since 1992 and no successful prosecutions.

24.               Police Shoot to Kill policy now in force; illegal under British common law, OK under EU corpus juris.

25.               EU conceived in Germany from 22nd June 1940 as the EEC – speech by Hermann Goering.

26.               First EEC conference Berlin University 1942, 13 nation summit Berlin 1943 run by von Ribbentrop

27.               After fall of Germany, the Germans switched the EU from a Nazi to a communist basis in 1946.

28.               Hitler’s Deutsche Verteiderungs Dienst Intelligence Department (DVD) still controls EU development.

29.               Edward Heath, Geoffrey Rippon, Roy Jenkins recruited by the DVD in 1958 as saboteurs.

30.               DVD has arranged finance to put pro-EU ownerships into British newspaper groups.

31.               EU has been sabotaging Britain with German Frankfurt School techniques since the 1950’s.

32.               The EU’s main subversive organisations in Britain are senior Freemasonry and Common Purpose

33.               The EU’s Common Purpose (CP) has trained 40,000 local leaders for “the post democratic era”

34.               CP controls the NHS, and is wrecking it with Frankfurt subversion techniques (eg continual change).

35.               Common Purpose has 400 staff inside the BBC censoring-out anti-EU news and and current affairs.

36.               Common Purpose has staff in hundreds of local newspapers censoring out anti-EU news

37.               Common Purpose is transferring power from councillors to the unelected council executives.

38.               Common Purpose has built the EU gravy trains inside local and national government.

39.               CP and Freemasonry snatch 4,500 children a year from good parents for forced adoption.

40.               CP has built most of Britain’s 8,500 quangos costing us £167 billion pa (Cabinet Office 2007 figs)

41.               These quangos bribe compliant, pro EU local officials and businessmen with £150,000+ salaries.

42.               ALL OUR JUDGES ARE NOW FREEMASONS, WHICH IS WHY BRITISH JUSTICE AND OUR COURTS ARE UTTERLY CORRUPT.

43.               The EU is corrupt and cannot account for 95% of its expenditure (yes, NINETY FIVE % LOST)

44.               The EU has over 200,000 offshore bank accounts from which it pays bribes.

45.               We now lose £45 billion a year trading with the EU. Outside, we had an even balance of payments.

46.               EU Constitution is similar to the Soviet. And EU Commissioners similar to Soviet Politburo members.

47.               The EU parliament is a sham with no power – just like the old Soviet parliament.

48.               THE LEADERSHIP OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY HAS BEEN CONTROLLED BY EU BILDERBERGERS SINCE THE 1960’S.

49.               The Labour and Lib Dem leaderships EU controlled for 20 years – that’s why your vote doesn’t count.

50.               The Amsterdam Treaty 1997 gave the EU control of our immigration, now running at 2.6 million pa.

51.               Our infrastructure can’t cope with the 10 million immigrants the EU has let in since 1997.

52.               380,000 highly qualified British emigrate annually to escape from the EU and its overcrowding.

53.               The EU and their Bilderbergers have moved 50,000 pro-EU people, freemasons and CP up into all positions of power over 40 years. You don’t progress in British government unless you are pro-EU.

Source: eutruth.org.uk

THE EU AND NORTH AMERICAN UNION

                                  Did you notice the European Union celebrated its 50th anniversary this month?

I don’t know about you, but I distinctly recall the launch of the EU in 1993 – 14 years ago. How is it that a 14-year-old government is celebrating its 50th anniversary?

It’s an important story – especially for Americans who don’t believe there is a real threat of or planning for a future North American Community confederating the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

Today, the Europeans proud of their regional government achievement see the real birth of the EU dating back to the 1957 Treaty of Rome, involving only six countries for the purpose of pooling their steel and coal resources.

The idea was to make it impossible for another internecine European war to take place because no one nation could dominate the industries of these strategic commodities. They also believed it would spur economic development.

It was, in modern parlance, a primitive free trade agreement – much less sweeping in scope than the North American Free Trade Agreement adopted by the U.S., Canada and Mexico just over a decade ago.

But the Euro-elite understand it was this baby step in the direction of integration that set the continent on the road to merger.

And that’s why the 50th anniversary celebrations are taking place all year long in Europe.

Today, those with similar plans for North America talk about them in muted terms. They will tell you it’s not really a European Union-style confederation they are seeking. It’s a simpler, more palatable North American Community.

Keep in mind, before the European Union emerged, it was called the European Community. Before that, it was the European Economic Community.

These things are accomplished in stages.

It should now be obvious to any thinking, rational person who can add two plus two that the North American Free Trade Agreement – NAFTA – was the first stage in a long-range plan for a European Union-style confederation in North America between the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

And that is not the endgame.

The endgame is world government.

Look at the WND story about President Bush’s plan for “integration” with the European Union. It’s another stunner.

“President Bush signed an agreement creating a ‘permanent body’ that commits the U.S. to ‘deeper transatlantic economic integration,’ without ratification by the Senate as a treaty or passage by Congress as a law,” reported WND.

“The ‘Transatlantic Economic Integration’ between the U.S. and the European Union was signed April 30 at the White House by Bush, German Chancellor Angela Merkel – the current president of the European Council – and European Commission President Jos? Manuel Barroso.

“The document acknowledges ‘the transatlantic economy remains at the forefront of globalization,’arguing that the U.S. and the European Union ‘seek to strengthen transatlantic economic integration.'”

This was not buried news that took WND investigative efforts to uncover. This was not some secret memo WND unearthed. This was not some Internet rumor. This announcement by Bush was posted on the White House website.

Yet, not a single news agency other than WND seized on the significance of this unilateral move by the Bush administration.

It’s called “not seeing the forest for the trees.”

The forest is globalization.

What is globalization?

It’s not just free trade. It’s not just economic cooperation. It’s not just a series of strategic agreements between nations. It’s shorthand for moving toward one-world government.

No one would have believed 50 years ago Europe could actually be governed as one large confederation. Today it is a reality.

This was not the result of the people of Europe clamoring for a centralized bureaucracy in Belgium. It was the result of careful, quiet planning by the European elite. And, ultimately, it was achieved not through the will of the people, but in spite of it.

Letter to Mr Soames

From: David

Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 12:03 PM

To: nicholas.soames.mp@parliament.uk

Subject: Treason

 

Dear Mr Soames, I am pleased that you have raised the question of Treason. I think your attack on Mr Gove without any evidence is a bit scare mongering and dodgy.

  HOWEVER the area of charges of Treason should be focused on ALL those Past and Present PM`s and Mp`s who advocate giving away our Sovereignty, WITHOUT the consent of the British people.

Our Constitution is quite clear, Our sovereignty can only be given away by being beaten in battle (which has not happened since 1066) and or with the consent of the British people.

Heath and Wilson both lied to the public that we were being enrolled in a Common Market when they knew it was a Political Union. Heath admitted such on TV a few years later.

Treason in conjunction with the EU Project has been rampant with the Political Class.

I say we should try all those who are still alive who advocate giving our Sovereignty with treason.

Thank you Mr Soames for at last bringing out the word that has been missing from all EU discussions.

Best Wishes

David Futers

Grimoldby

Lincs

A PROUD ENGLISH PATRIOT OF 72 YEARS.

The Sinister Difference Between "ISIS" and "ISIL"

I KNEW IT !!  Every time I heard POTUS or any member of his crew say ISIL instead of ISIS, I just KNEW there was more to it than a mistake...  Read this and remember it!

The Sinister Difference Between "ISIS" and "ISIL"
Because I've been asked this question numerous times, here is an explanation of the difference between the terms ISIS and ISIL.  ISIS = Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.  Iraq is to the east of Jordan (shaped like the hatchet) and Syria is to the north.
ISIL = Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

Iraq is still to the east of Jordan, and "the Levant" is a term that comes from "the rising (of the sun, i.e., to the east)" and is basically the land along the Mediterranean - that includes Lebanon, Israel, and those countries along there.

By saying ISIL, you "negate Israel as its own country and lump it in with the rest of the countries   along the Mediterranean and Israel sort of disappears (loses its sovereignty) and becomes part of "the Levant, which is therefore part of ISIL.

If you've wondered, as I have, why all government agencies and especially Obama calls it ISIL and even spells it out every time it's used, instead of ISIS as the rest of the world does, here's the answer.

 

Decoding Obama's speech reveals some startling revelations.
In one press conference after another, when referring to the Muslim terror super-group ISIS, United States President Barack Obama will use the term ISIL, instead of their former name ISIS, or current name Islamic State.  

 

Have you ever wondered about that? 

 

Here is the difference: What makes up the near exact center of the Muslim Levant?  Israel.

ISIL stands for the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant.

Now, to us Westerners we don't really make much of a distinction, do we?

No, honestly from our perspective it's all about the same. But how would a Muslim living in the Middle East view it?

Just what is the Levant anyway?   Let's take a look.  

 

The geographical term LEVANT refers to a multi-nation region in the Middle East.   It's a land bridge between Turkey to the north and Egypt to the south.   If you look on a map, however, in the near exact middle of the nations that comprise the Levant, guess what you see?  Come on, guess!  

It's Israel.

So, When Barack Obama refers over and over to the Islamic State as ISIL, he is sending a message to Muslims all over the Middle East, that he personally does not recognize Israel as a sovereign nation, but as territory belonging to the Islamic State.

Now you know why Obama says that he has no plan, no goal, and no stated aim for dealing with ISIS.  But he does have a plan, and it's a really nasty, diabolical one. Obama's plan is to drag his feet for as long as he can, doing only the bare minimum that Congress forces him to do.  His plan to buy ISIL as much time as possible to make as many gains as they can.

Listen as Obama and his press secretary and the spokesperson for the State Department and his Joint Chiefs of Staff painstakingly spells out the letters  I-S-I-L so there is no doubt in your mind.  And it's working.  The Islamic State has garnered millions of dollars, a vast cache of weapons, and in their latest foray have captured Syrian fighter jets and now 12 commercial passenger planes.  With each passing day that Obama fulfills his stated aim of doing nothing, the Islamic State grows by leaps and bounds. The ultimate goal, of course, has not changed and will never change.

The ultimate goal is the destruction of Israel.  Now you know a little bit more about why Obama chooses his words so carefully.

 

Obama is a Kenyan foreign national Muslim Jihad Dimwity destroying America from within while we idly stand by.

 

 

Article 50 is a poisoned chalice

Article 50 is a poisoned chalice – Don’t drink from it

Robert Henderson
Those who think that British Europhile politicians   will  play fair if Britain votes to leave the EU in June will be horribly disappointed. The public may think that if the British people have voted to leave the EU and that is an end of it regardless of the wishes of the Government.   Sadly, there is every reason to expect that Brexit will be anything but a clean break from the EU.
To begin with there has been no commitment by Cameron to stand down as PM if the vote goes against him.  Quite the opposite for he  has publicly stated several  times that  he will stay on and many  Tory MPs, including some of those in favour of leaving like Chris Grayling ,  have said that he must remain in No 10 whatever the outcome of the referendum .
If Cameron stays on as PM after a vote to leave Britain would be in the absurd position of having a man in charge of  Britain’s withdrawal who has shown his all too eager  commitment to the EU by the feebleness of   the demands he made during  his “renegotiation” and his regularly repeated statement before the conclusion of the “renegotiation”  that he was sure he would get new terms which would allow him to campaign for Britain to remain within the EU.   
A post-referendum   Cameron  government entrusted with negotiating Britain’s departure from the EU would mean that not only the  PM  but  the majority of his  cabinet and ministers below  cabinet  level  will  be  drawn from the same pro-EU personnel as he has today.  In those circumstances Cameron and his fellow Europhiles would almost certainly try to stitch Britain back into the EU with a deal such as that granted to  Norway and Switzerland. If that happened Britain could end up with the most important issue in the British  public’s mind –  free movement  of not only labour but free movement of anyone with the right to permanent residence in the EU – untouched .
But if Cameron leaves  of his own accord soon after a vote to leave Britain could still end up with a Europhile  Prime Minister and Cabinet.  Why? By  far the most likely person to succeed him  is Boris Johnson. If he  does become  PM there is every reason to believe that he will also do his level best to enmesh Britain back into  the EU.  Ever since Johnson  became the Telegraph’s  Brussels correspondent in the 1990s he has been deriding the EU, but until coming out as a supporter of voting to leave in the past week he has never advocated Britain’s withdrawal.  Johnson also gave a very strong hint  in the  Daily Telegraph article in which he announced his support for leaving the EU that his support for Britain leaving the EU was no more than  a ploy to persuade the EU to offer  more significant concessions than those offered to Cameron. Johnson has also been a regular advocate of the value of immigration.
The scenario of Cameron or Johnson deliberately subverting the intention of a referendum vote  to leave are all too plausible. There has been no public discussion let alone  agreement by leading  politicians over what the British government may or may not negotiate in the event of a vote to leave.   Nor has there been any suggestion by any British politician or party  that whatever the terms offered by the EU the British public will have the right to vote on them in a referendum.  Britain could be left  with  an agreement decided by the British Government and the EU which might do nothing of what  the British public most wants and  has voted for, namely, the return of sovereignty and  the control of Britain’s borders.
Then  there is Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty.  Both Cameron and Johnson are committed to doing so within the terms of the Lisbon Treaty of  2009.  Far from a vote to leave in the referendum putting Britain in the position of a  sovereign nation engaging in a negotiation for a treaty with the EU  it traps  Britain into an extended period of negotiation whose outcome is dependent on the agreement or non-agreement of  the 27 other EU member states and the  EU Parliament.  Let me quote  the Article in  full:
Article 50

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49. (

Article 50  means that Britain could spend two years negotiating and get no treaty because the Council of Ministers could veto it through Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) or the European Parliament reject it. Britain would then have the option of either asking for an extension (which could be indefinite because there is no limit mentioned in the Article) or leaving without a treaty.  There is also the further complication that if a treaty was agreed by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament it would still have to be agreed by 27 EU member states,  either through Parliamentary vote or  in the case of a few including France, a referendum.  Moreover,  even if a treaty is agreed and accepted by all EU member states, this would leave  Britain up in the air for what could be a considerable time as each of the 27 members goes through the process of getting  the agreement of their Parliament or electorate.
The OUT camp must make it clear that  it would be both damaging and unnecessary for the UK to abide by this Treaty requirement. It  would allow the EU to inflict considerable damage on the UK both during the period prior to formally  leaving and afterwards if  the price of leaving with the EU’s agreement was  for  UK to sign up to various obligations, for example, to continue paying a large annual sum to the EU for ten years . It would also give  the Europhile UK political elite  ample opportunity to keep the UK attached to the EU in the manner that Norway and Switzerland are attached by arguing that it is the best deal Britain  can get.  If there was no second  referendum on the  terms  negotiated for Britain leaving the government of the day could simply pass the matter into law without the British voters having a say.
The Gordian knot of Article 50 can be cut simply repealing the European Communities Act and asserting the sovereignty of Parliament.   No major UK party could  object to this on principle because all three have, at one time or another,  declared that Parliament remains supreme and can repudiate anything the EU does if it so chooses.
If the stay-in camp argue that would be illegal because of the  treaty obligation, the OUT camp should simply emphasise  (1) that international law is no law because there is never any means of enforcing it within its jurisdiction is a state rejects it and (2) that treaties which do not allow for contracting parties to simply withdraw are profoundly undemocratic because they bind future governments. There is also the fact that the EU and its predecessor the EEC has constantly breached its own rules, spectacularly so in the case of the Eurozone.  Hence, for the EU treaties are anything but sacrosanct.

Letter to Philip Hammond

hammondp@parliament.uk


Ph        (44) 01730829416                                     Sunny Bank,
                                                                               Church Lane,
Mobile  (44) 07717222459                                         West Meon,
e-mail irfrancis@onetel.com                                     Petersfield,
                                                                                  Hampshire  GU32 1LD

Sir,
Your support for the subjugation of this country to the anti-democratic, terminally incompetent and doomed European Union is akin to the behaviour of Lord Halifax in 1940, faced with the previous attempt to force us into a similar regime.

You are  even  more of a disgrace, given that you claimed for many years to be a eurosceptic.

I am increasingly confident that despite your efforts and those of other weasel-worded, two-faced traitors we will win our freedom, and that on June 24th you will realise that your miserable political career is at an end.

In the meantime I show below a few quotations that sum up my views of your conduct and that of other europhiles who are betraying the people of this country.


Idris Francis

                                          --------------------------------------


"There never did, there never will, and there never can, exist a Parliament, or any description of men, or any generation of men, in any country, possessed of the right or the power of binding and controlling posterity to the "end of time," or of commanding for ever how the world shall be governed, or who shall govern it; and therefore all such clauses, acts or declarations by which the makers of them attempt to do what they have neither the right nor the power to do, nor the power to execute, are in themselves null and void.

Every age and generation must be as free to act for itself in all cases as the age and generations which preceded it. The vanity and presumption of governing beyond the grave is the most ridiculous and insolent of all tyrannies. Man has no property in man; neither has any generation a property in the generations which are to follow. The Parliament or the people of 1688, or of any other period, had no more right to dispose of the people of the present day, or to bind or to control them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or the people of the present day have to dispose of, bind or control those who are to live a hundred or a thousand years hence. Every generation is, and must be, competent to all the purposes which its occasions require. It is the living, and not the dead, that are to be accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power and his wants cease with him; and having no longer any participation in the concerns of this world, he has no longer any authority in directing who shall be its governors, or how its government shall be organised, or how administered."

Thomas Paine, "Rights of Man" 1791/92
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/thomas_paine/rights_of_man/part1.html
"With inky blot and  rotten parchment bond
That England that was wont to conquer others
 Hath made a shameful conquest of itself"Shakespeare

"For those looking for security, be forewarned that there's nothing more insecure than a political promise."
Harry Browne

"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive."
 C.S. Lewis

“No man survives when freedom fails. The best men rot in filthy jails. And those who cry `appease, appease' are hanged by those they try to please.”
Hiram Mann

"If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more, it will lose that too."
Somerset Maugham

"Place me not with those who are weak of mind and willingly give up the rights of others, for these poor ignorant souls know not that the rights they give up are their own!"
 Warren Friton

"The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedients."
Edmund Burke
 "Is there not some chosen curse, Some hidden thunder in the stores of Heaven, Red with uncommon wrath to blast the man, Who owes his greatness to his country's ruin?"
 Cato

"A nation can survive its fools and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.

For the traitor appears not a traitor - he speaks in accents familiar to his , and he wears their face and garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men.

He rots the soul of a nation - he works secretly and alone in the night to the pillars of a city - he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared."
 Cicero n 42 BC

"There are no acts of treachery more deeply concealed than those which lie  under the pretence of duty, or under some profession of necessity"
Cicero.
 "When I contemplate the natural dignity of man; when I feel...for the honor and happiness of its character, I become irritated at the attempt to govern mankind by force and fraud, as if they were all knaves and fools, and can scarcely avoid disgust at those who are thus imposed upon." 
 Thomas Paine

"Oh, my countrymen! What will our children say, when they read the history of these times? Should they find we tamely gave away without one noble struggle, the most invaluable of earthly blessings? As they drag the galling chain, will they not execrate us? If we have any respect for things sacred; any regard to the dearest treasures on earth; if we have one tender sentiment for posterity; if we would not be despised by the whole world - let us in the most open, solemn manner, and with determined fortitude, swear we will die, if we cannot live free men!"Josiah Quincy, Jr., 1788 published in the Boston Gazette

"...There is no security, no safety, in the appeasement of evil."
Ronald Reagan

"Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people.  Those who have known freedom, and then lost it, have never known it again." Ronald Reagan

"A government above the law is a menace to be defeated" 
Lord Scarman

"Let me conjure you in the name of our common country, as you value your sacred honor, as you respect the rights of humanity, and as you regard the military and national character of America, to express your utmost horror and detestation of the man who wishes, under any specious pretenses, to overturn the liberties of our country."
George Washington

"Live free or die, death is not the worst of evils"
General John Stark

 "No one understood better than Stalin that the true object of propaganda is neither to convince nor even to persuade, but to produce a uniform pattern of public utterance in which the first trace of unorthodox thought immediately reveals itself as a jarring dissonance." 
Alan Bullock, in Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives

"It does not matter how many lies we tell, because once we have won, no one will be able to do anything about it."  
Minuted statement by Dr. Goebbels to Adolf Hitler, early 1930s
 "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", by William L Shirer.

"After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd."  Alexis de Tocqueville

"We shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills: we shall never surrender"
Churchill speech in the House of Commons, 4 June 194

"I have never understood why public opinion about European ideas should be taken into account."
Raymond Barre, former French Prime Minister and Heath said the same.

"The Europe of Maastricht could only have been created in the absence of
democracy."
Clause Cheysson, former French Foreign Secretary

"The top priority (is) to turn the EU into a single political state"
The Times 26/11/98 - Joshka Fischer, German Foreign Minister

"The future will belong to the Germans....when we build the house of Europe.
In the next two years, we will make the process of European integration
irreversible. This is a really big battle but it is worth the fight."
Chancellor Kohl
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'We are with EUrope, but not of it. We are linked, but not combined. We are
associated, but not absorbed and should EUropean Statesmen address us and
say "Shall we speak for thee?", we should reply: "Nay Sir, for we do well among our own people".
Winston Spencer Churchill

"The facts embodied in Magna Carta and the circumstances giving rise to them were buried or misunderstood. The underlying idea of the sovereignty of the law, long existent in feudal custom, was raised by it into a doctrine for the national State. And when in subsequent ages the State, swollen with its own authority, has attempted to ride roughshod over the rights or liberties of the subject it is to this doctrine that appeal has again and again been made, and never as yet, without success."
Winston Churchill. A History of the English Speaking Peoples (1956) Vol. 1,

"Perhaps I may remind noble Lords of what our essential civil rights, as guaranteed by the common law, are: the presumption of innocence; the right to a fair hearing; no man to be obliged to testify against himself; the rule against double jeopardy; no retrospective legislation; no legislation to be given an effect contrary to international law--an old principle which has been there for years; freedom of expression; and freedom of association. All of those were in the minds of our delegates firmly secured already by the common law to this country, and not intended to be superseded or modified by the new inter-state obligations in the convention".Lord Wilberforce, Hansard 3 Nov 1997 : Column 1279. 

                                       -------------------------------------------------

Phoney renegotiation completed

Alvechurch Bugle  016 – 007 ( 22-2-16)

Phase One, the phoney renegotiation completed, and this morning Mr Cameron was counting the cost of trying to con the electorate,

and he hoped, most of his own party.

It didn’t work, it was never going to work, and he has discovered belatedly, that not all of his cabinet colleagues are YES men, and hence he is haemorrhaging support faster than the Titanic took on water.

You could get away with it in the 1970s  and Edward Heath did, but

the populace have wised up, and via the internet now have access to much more in-depth information, and he will have to fall back on the N.P.S  ( National Propaganda Service ) to save him.

The ranks of the OUT campaign grows steadily and former waverers become emboldened, and the undecided are learning who is thinking what, and why,.

But for the OUT faction it is a dangerous time and one for being extra vigilant, because the Commission and its dark side plotters will not be idle between now and June, and will rapidly implement Plan B, when the British electorate has spoken.

This will be in the form of a raft of :  separation delaying tactics, involving huge amounts of financial compensation for the quite insensitive disruption that we will be causing to their plans for a European Shangri la ,  unjustifiably delayed by us those backward savages from across the channel.

They will miraculously discover, tucked away in some Treaty, a timescale for separation, probably running to the end of the century, meaning that EU rule will still apply in Westminster and Whitehall, and the flag will fly in perpetuity etc etc.

We must make it clear : OUT is OUT, and that we will immediately commence removing unwanted legislation from our statute, and that

all EU directives held here,  will immediately be put into suspension,

pending the full examination, they never originally received.  

Never forget, that the EU was conceived to destroy Britain by non-military means.

Ed.     -   -   -   -  Bromsgrovia  

Conning the world - not much!

Marvellous what they leave out of the frame in the pictures which they want to publish to the world.  

Oops!  Cut! Get that man to sit down!  Guess even this would not convince our police and politicians that this was all staged. 

These people have proven themselves to be invaders, not refugees.  

Take two!

 

Referendum

   A referendum implies that our own Constitution is negotiable. 

                                                         Our Constitution is not negotiable.

   Our elected leaders should understand that overthrowing the Constitution is treason, conspiring to overthrow the Constitution is treason, contemplating overthrowing the Constitution is treason and inciting the people to overthrow the Constitution, as in calling for a referendum, is also treason. Our elected leaders should understand that our rights and freedoms belong to the people and it is not in their power to sign them away.