A guantlet thrown down (2)

The first post in this series has resulted in WfW being subjected to a number of DOS attacks directed at that article, so it may be time to ‘up the ante’ as it were by repeating the charge levied against Nick Clegg and this time directing it at David Cameron.

The Conservative Party has just issued a video for the forthcoming European elections:

Cameron did not veto any treaty as there was no treaty on the table to veto; Britain still contributes to euro bailouts through its membership of the IMF; and Cameron did not cut the EU budget as Britain ended up contributing more.

The video states that Cameron will bring back powers from the EU by: taking back control of justice and home affairs; yet he is in the process of agreeing to cede some of them; by taking control of our borders intimating that Britain will control who enters our country, yet knows he cannot stem immigration from  any of the other 27 member states of the EU; securing more trade intimating the setting up of trade deals, yet the negotiation of trade deals is an EU competence; giving the people a yes/no referendum by 2017 following a renegotiation of Britain’s membership terms, yet the only way he can do this would be by invoking Article 50 of the TEU – something he has not mentioned.

Based on the claims he makes in this video  not forgetting his infamous claim that Norway is governed by fax, it is necessary to state that David Cameron is a liar and a charlatan – and pointing out that he has the same opportunity as that offered to Clegg.


Share
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailfacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow
twitterrsstwitterrss

5 Responses

  1. cosmic says:

    “it is necessary to state that David Cameron is a liar and a charlatan”.

    No it’s not, he was making synthetic counterfactual statements.

    That broadcast reminds me of a description I came across of surrealism, “It describes a world which might exist, but doesn’t”, in the way that Cameron was talking about an EU, or ‘Europe’ as he likes to call it, which might exist, but doesn’t.

    In particular he never explains how these negotiations are going to take place, leave alone reach any sort of conclusion by 2017, and what happens when the others say no, as they certainly would, since his modest proposals involve changing the very nature of the EU.

    If this stuff has any contact with reality at all, it’s a blind to set us up for Associate Membership as a non-Euro country.

    • david says:

      So he was lying – in which case it is necessary to point it out.

      • cosmic says:

        In practical terms, yes.

        Looked at from a different point of view, it’s probably more like the truth is so horrible that they can’t face it and admit that this reform twaddle is just that. The truth or otherwise doesn’t come into it; it’s a tribal chant.

        I’m sure it’s in the back of Cameron’s mind that it doesn’t really matter what he says on this, because he won’t be around to do any of it.

        I’m not sure about the Cast Iron Promise. I think he was saying something which would go down well with a particular audience, but didn’t quite appreciate the implications, so started to backpedal. Then he found it was convenient to allow people to believe things that weren’t really true (that was mainly for the Euro elections). Then he was hoping that Klaus would bail him out. Then he had to come clean and tried to point out the small print.

        I don’t think it was lying in the sense of coming out with something he knew to be untrue from the beginning, but it was closely akin and it certainly wasn’t honest and aboveboard. I think a lot ot Tories actually do believe this reform nonsense, but it’s not a belief they are prepared to examine.

        Lying fits the bill.

        Years ago I had a manager who spoke about various people in the company who were given to positive talking. He said the problem was that when these things didn’t work out, people weren’t inclined to believe they had been talking positively; they thought they were liars or fantasists.

        • david says:

          Nie try but if it was closely akin and wasn’t honest and aboveboard then he lied. Someone either speaks the truth or he doesn’t and if he doesn’t then he lies.

          End of story, as they say………

          • cosmic says:

            Not really.

            It was dealt with in a thread on EURef a bit back

            http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=84798

            It seems to me that much of that broadcast is dealing in statements of faith, and you don’t destroy faith by denouncing it as lies. More fruitful approaches are ridicule and asking questions which have no answers or produce even more obvious B/S.

            I don’t think calling Cameron and Clegg liars is that useful.

            Clegg seems to have a great faith in the EU, which he can’t explain except in blandishments and statements of dubious verifiability, but others can readily supply motives for his lack of curiosity.

            Cameron is dealing in things which he can’t explain, such as how this renegotiation process is to happen in the context of the EU procedures and motive can be suggested for his stance, such as he knows he won’t be around to do any of it, so he can indulge in hyperbole.

Hosted By PDPS Internet Hosting

© Witterings from Witney 2012