Tag Archive: the Boiling Frog

2013
05/14

Category:
David's Musings

TAG:




COMMENTS:
No Comments »

Not another Cameron promise?

So the Cameroon party has published a Referendum Bill – and what, pray, makes this latest production of political crap any different to what has gone before?

As our current “Dictator in situ”, let us remember that Cameron said, in an interview with El Pais as reported by The Boiling Frog, that he would not honour any referendum that called for the UK to leave the EU. So just what is this latest PR stunt and why the hell should we believe what it purports?

As an aside, just what the hell business is it of Obama to tell us what is in our best interests? Who the hell is Obama where the governance of this country is concerned? One can but think that Obama has designs above his station. FOB – as in Foxtrot Oscar Barack!

Reverting to this EU Referendum Bill, it is worth noting that Clause 3 (1), (2) and (3) are basically meaningless – true to form, where Cameron is concerned – in that the the original “promise” can be changed at the whim of the Secretary of State at the time, whose strings can be pulled by the Dictator-in-situ. And that is democracy?

In the Grauniad we read an article headlined: “Conservatives should cherish their EU rebels. Parliament needs troublemakers” – no Parliament doesn’t, what Parliament needs is MPs that do the bidding of the electorate! This comes back to just what is the function of Parliament. Needless to say, we have Daniel Hannan jumping on the bandwagon of this Referndum Bill – unfortunately he has obviously not read Clause 3, (1), (2) or (3).

Isabel Hardman, Speccie – Coffee House Blog, has written on this latest Cameron “fudge”, citing the opinion of Douglas Carswell (surprise not in that support), but when has Carswell – or Hannan, come to that – written about what happens when a referendum vote is for us to leave the EU? The exit plan is?

This latest idea is no more than another form of brainwashing by the political class on those who have not the slightest idea of what is involved – and on that ignorance will the unknowing  be once again led up the garden path by the knowing.

 

2013
04/27

Category:
David's Musings

TAG:







COMMENTS:
2 Comments »

And this is democracy?

Three articles that show the answer to the question posed in the heading to this post must surely be a resounding “NO”.

Sunny Hundal, writing in the Guardian Comment is Free (CiF):

“Much of modern politics is based on a series of confidence tricks.”

Daniel Kawczynski, writing on Conservative Home:

“With the profound impact the media can have on elections, political parties have become particularly adept at tailoring and conveying their messages and ideologies to fit into a political strategy.  Indeed, these considerations are important and right to make; they can make or break the fate of a political party.”

So, all this talk about democracy, MPs representing constituent’s views and being honourable people – is all based on a series of confidence tricks?

That the only reason political parties have become adept at tailoring and conveying their messages and ideologies is so that they don’t break the fate of their political party, thus allowing them to gain, or remain in, power?

Little noticed in our media, as reported by The Boiling Frog, was Cameron’s admission that he would ignore any call by the people in a referendum to withdraw from membership of the European Union.

Where the (next word deleted) is there any aspect of democracy in any of those three statements?

An even more important question is whether we have sufficient brick wall – and bullets for our AK47s – when the opportunity finally comes to dispose of our present political class, quangocrats, civil servants, media workers and associated dross that blight our lives?

Just asking…………….

 

2013
04/09

Category:
David's Musings

TAG:



COMMENTS:
2 Comments »

You can lead a horse to water……..

…but you can’t make it drink; which translated means that you can give someone the opportunity to do something, but you cannot force them to do it if they do not want to – an idiom which rather neatly demonstrates two contrasting deficiencies in our present system of representative democracy.

We have the ridiculous situation whereby politicians can promise the earth in their election manifestos but if they change their mind once elected we, the electorate, have no means of forcing them to honour said promises. On the other hand, if politicians enact legislation, which to the electorate is an anathema, said electorate have no option but to comply even though they have no wish so to do.

Dan Hodges, who being an avowed disciple of Blair is therefore no lover of MilibandE, has a quite telling article on the Daily Telegraph website – as does The Boiling Frog on this article. In both articles there runs a common theme: two politicians; one has no intention of moving toward that which those he is supposed to represent want, but intends moving those he is supposed to represent to that which he wants, the second has no intention of providing that which those he is supposed to represent want but intends to provide that which he wants. Both politicians share commonalities: they both profess to represent those they are meant to serve but do not, both pretend to be servants but are not, both pretend to be honourable men but are not.

Both use words for their own purpose and gain – contrast their motives with that of the woman in this video. Is that not how politicians should be using words – for the benefit of us? Politicians can be made to use their words for our benefit – but that will entail a revolution by the people, one which states quite simply that until they, the politicians, agree to this they ain’t getting our vote.

To break the stranglehold the political class have on this nation of ours is really is quite simple.

 

2013
02/09

Category:
David's Musings

TAG:









COMMENTS:
2 Comments »

Article 50 – and a “nag” or two…….

There has appeared on the blog of The Boiling Frog three articles on the above subject which should be required reading for all those interested in matters EU.

Besides being highly informative TBF debunks the arguments which are raised, should the UK invoke Article 50, about “punitive” laws being imposed on us, which as he states would be against the fundamental principles of the treaties and spirit of the EU and the Single Market. In dealing with the two-year period stipulated within Article 50 (it can, as TBF, states be shortened or lengthened by agreement) he explains how such punitive laws could not be imposed due to the timescale that the formation of law takes. In the final part TBF deals with the matter of possible retribution measures that might be taken by the EU for failing to implement any such law – were it able to be passed -  or, come to that, any law passed within this two year period.

There are two further points worth making at this juncture, one of which TBF covers in his articles. The first of these points is to do with the “repeal the ECA1972 and with one bound we are free” meme, one that once again John Redwood was proposing just a few days ago – a post within which when challenged by me in the comments section he refused to accept that he was wrong, although he did have the grace to concede that exiting from the EU via Article 50 was another way. With such “leading lights” as Redwood within the eurosceptic camp, one is left with a sense of foreboding where the success of the ‘No’ campaign is concerned.

The second point worth making is that Farage and Ukip, among others, are clamouring for a referendum now and until a week or so ago – on the occasion of Cameron’s speech – Farage had not mentioned the magic words “Article 50″. Having at last done so, why did the content of TBF’s three articles not appear on Ukip’s website? Why does it take an independent blogger to do this type of work?

On that last point, let me move onto the “matter du jour” – and no, it is not the EU budget “agreement”, another story on which the media have it so wrong – namely the question of horse meat having been found to enter the food chain. Richard North, EUReferendum, has three posts, here, here and here which are also “required reading” on this subject. Again, one has to query why it should be an independent blogger who provides all the “detail” and information? Just where are the MSM? As Richard North points out, this entire matter has arisen through a checking system introduced by the EU and which relies purely on a “paper trail” and as such is a massive failure by the EU. Food is an EU competence, as Owen Paterson has stated, consequently the UK cannot take unilateral action to solve the difficulties that the problem has thrown up which means that the incompetents that caused this problem – the EU – are now involved, something which does not give one much confidence in the new measures that will surely be forthcoming. One also has to ask where Ukip and Farage are on this matter as their silence has been rather noticeable – should they not be at the forefront of the condemnation, explaining how and why it has arisen?  At the time of writing, this is Ukip’s home page:

Neither the political class nor the MSM have the slightest understanding of the word omnishambles when they use it, which no doubt they will once they realize the true extent of this problem that presently nags at our attention. In plain, simple English it is not an omnishambles, it is a complete disaster, as is the European Union, politics in the UK and they system of democracy under which and by which we are governed.

2013
01/23

Category:
David's Musings

TAG:






COMMENTS:
4 Comments »

That speech

“A liar begins with making falsehood appear like truth, and ends with making truth itself appear like falsehood.
William Shenstone

The only thing worse than a liar is a liar that’s also a hypocrite!
Tennessee Williams”

David Cameron’s speech began with a lie in that he stated he wanted to talk about the future of Europe when in fact he was talking about the future of our country. In speaking about the millions that lay dead across the world as a result of a battle for peace and liberty – and also mentioning that we should never forget their sacrifice – is it not odd that he supports a course of action which makes a mockery of the sacrifice paid to retain that liberty? I talk of his support for continued membership of the European Union providing he is able to repatriate certain powers, yet did not those who died fighting for this country fight because they were not prepared to relinquish one tiny aspect of their liberty to decide their own future?

As only a country can have people, I take exception to Cameron talking about the European Union and its peoples, the European Union is not a country therefore it has no people. I also take exception to him, or any other politician for that matter, talking about the defence of our sovereignty – the minute this country ceded the first power to decide something for itself and then action that decision regardless of what any other country thought, it no longer had sovereignty. It is disingenuous to couple the European Union with the words “prosperity, stability and being an anchor of freedom and democracy” when this country’s freedom to make its own decisions is no more and the European Union is most definitely not a democracy. It is indeed  hypocritical to maintain that Britain today is independent when it most assuredly is not, neither do we need to be reminded our country is open – one look at the immigration figures confirms that.

It is possible to lie by omission which Cameron does so well and doesn’t break what appears to be the habit of a lifetime when maintaining that membership of the European Union is necessary to have access to the Single Market. Richard North, EUReferendum; The Boiling Frog and Autonomous Mind have passed judgement on Cameron’s speech, with Richard North picking-up on what was probably Cameron’s biggest lie, namely that Norway has no say over EU legislation, a point also noted by The Boiling Frog. It is on the subject of lies that this entire question of the UK’s membership of the European Union hinges. Cameron is a liar, as has been demonstrated, so why should anyone trust anything he says now or in the future? As I write, I notice that Richard North has just posted on this matter of Cameron’s lies, making the point that The Great Deception continues.

Still on the subject of lies, one fears for the fairness of any referendum that is held and especially so when we can see that even now both sides of the debate are each telling lies. Where Cameron’s desire to renegotiate our membership of the European Union is concerned, I notice what appears at first sight to be conciliatory statements coming from political leaders and politicians of other Member States. As Autonomous Mind points out, if Cameron believes he can break-up the Acquis then he is being a tad delusional, despite what may be conciliatory statements and because of that, the fear must be that Cameron may return from his “negotiations” with changes that amount to no more than window-dressing and that – as in 1975 when Harold Wilson sold his country a pup – Cameron will repeat Wilson’s trick.

Of course, as in common with all liars Cameron is also devious so the questions which The Boiling Frog raises in his post are extremely pertinent. The really depressing factor in all this is that it matters not who inhabits No10, that inhabitant will do all that they can to skew the referendum to obtain an ‘In’ result, which means those of us fighting for ‘Out’ have the mother of all battles on our hands – and that last point is what one might term an even sad’m state of affairs.

 

 

2013
01/02

Category:
David's Musings

TAG:



COMMENTS:
2 Comments »

A verbal scrap……

…. developing twixt Open Europe vs The Boiling Frog and I on the subject of their last blogpost.

Please do not hesitate to “pile-in” – the more the merrier, as they say……..

 

2013
01/01

Category:
David's Musings

TAG:









COMMENTS:
2 Comments »

On the wrong track – again

Every New Year we are regaled in the media with articles about the inexorable rise in rail fares and lo and behold Andrew Gimson, writing in the Guardian, does not disappoint. From this article:

“As if the tortuous ticketing arrangements weren’t enough, fares will on Wednesday rise by an average of 3.9%, or 4.2% for season tickets. This is not, however, something that can be blamed on the train companies. For year after year, ticket prices have risen by more than the rate of inflation because our politicians have decided that passengers should bear an increasing proportion of the cost of improving our railways.” (Emphasis mine)

Our politicians have decided squat-diddly – but those in Brussels most definitely have and the criticism that I made of Isabel Hardman yesterday also applies to Gimson. Once again we have a so-called journalist spreading misinformation because he is guilty of parroting that given to him by his contacts within the political class and because he has not carried out the necessary research.

To negate repeating myself, perhaps readers may care to refer to a post from August last year on this subject of rail fare increases, coupled with the principle of “user pays” and “polluter pays” – and do please follow the links contained therein. In this regard there is a a little-known principle of Community law known as the “occupied field”. What this means is that, once the EU has legislated in an area of its competence – as laid down by the treaties – even though the legislation may not be comprehensive, the area or “field” is deemed to be “occupied”. The significant of this is that member states are then specifically prohibited from making their own laws in that field, without the express permission of the European Commission. Transport, be that by air, rail, road or water is now an occupied field.

The United Kingdom was taken into what was then the Common Market, or EEC, on a lie and our continued membership is maintained on a lie. Christopher Booker, writing in the Mail, had an excellent article on that original deception. That we are still being lied to is illustrated by Booker’s comment:

“The real problem the British people have had with the ‘European project’, as its insiders call it, is that they have never really begun to understand its real nature, and what was always intended to be its ultimate goal. The chief reason for this is that our politicians have never properly explained it to us.”

Not only have our politicians never explained it properly to us, but neither have the media and while we are “blessed” with so-called journalists, of which Gimson and Hardman are examples. it falls on proper journalists like Christopher Booker and bloggers like Richard North, Autonomous Mind and the Boiling Frog (to name a few) to so do.

Afterthought: If readers would prefer a slightly more ‘tongue-in-cheek’ history of our relationship with the European Union, then perhaps this, from Caedmon’s Cat, may be of interest.

2012
12/10

Category:
David's Musings

TAG:



COMMENTS:
3 Comments »

Same-sex marriage

This question seems to be dominating the time our political class are  supposed to spend on ‘weighty matters of state’ and I for one am at a total loss to understand what business it is of theirs to interfere in matters of religion and the beliefs which various creeds have. The Boiling Frog has beaten me to this with a post in which the content is one with which I concur.

TBF is quite correct to maintain that democracy in this country has, in his words, ‘gone AWOL’ and to repeat the obvious point that this will eventually end up in the European Court. Once again this matter of same-sex marriage is but yet another example of ‘social engineering’, a practice so beloved of the political class, the ramifications of which they have not ‘considered’.

A classic example of this ability not to consider the ramifications of laws they intend implementing is that of multiculturalism. In this video (embedding disabled – apologies), stating at 3:50 Lord Lester QC, on the subject of multiculturalism, admits that the model they had was that everyone should share the values of being British and that there were ramifications they did not expect – in other words they had not thought things through. As with multiculturalism, same-sex marriage is another ‘idea’ that the political class intend to impose on us with no apparent concern about how we, the people, feel.

If politicians can impose a way of life upon us based on a ‘model’, then as believers in equality I am sure the political class will have no objection if we the people demand the imposition of a way of life on them based on a model that we have!

 

2012
11/19

Category:
David's Musings

TAG:







COMMENTS:
Comments Closed

Like a circle in a spiral, like a wheel within a wheel

Autonomous Mind linked to a post from one who Richard North recently renamed The Foiling Brog, on the subject of David Cameron’s Address to the CBI. Both AM and TBF wrote their articles prior to the text of Cameron’s speech becoming known – and now that it is, it is worth mentioning other points he made.

Setting to one side the point that TBF made about politicians promising one thing but delivering another, as with any speech by a politician what is immediately obvious is the belief in their divine right to govern, to rule.

Witness that we need a government to order our lives; that they inherited a deficit bigger than Spain’s or Greece – not so, Mr. Cameron, it is we the people that inherited the deficit. Cameron informs us he ensures that his government treats people equally – thus confirming my long-held assertion that politicians and government consider themselves our master. It would appear that Cameron’s sense of importance knows no bounds if his remark about Parliamentary Select Committees is to be taken at face value.

As TBF has raised the point about politicians saying one thing and meaning another – allow me to add a further example: David Cameron’s speech outside 10 Downing Street, as Prime Minister, on 11th May 2010, from which:

“…….and yes it is about making sure people are in control – and that the politicians are always their servant and never their masters.”

Not only do politicians promise one thing and deliberately practise the opposite but also in the way of most authoritarians, when asked a question then ignore the question and provide their own ‘take’ on the subject. This is illustrated by Restoring Britain who comments on last weeks Question Time. It will be recalled that the panel were asked for their views on the matter of whether companies should be boycotted, those who pay a very low rate of tax in the UK.

There is a certain element of irony in that, as there is in David Cameron complaining about EU regulation and so doing at the home of the CBI who are one of the biggest lobbyists for more regulation across the entire sphere of economic activity – as Richard North, EUReferendum, points out – and it is an irony that appears to have gone over not only Camerons head but also the collective heads of the CBI.

To a certain extent, when considering anything that those within the ‘bubble of Westminster’ say or write it has to be remembered that their words are not aimed at us – they are aimed at those within the ‘bubble’; hence the title to this post.

As AM stated at the end of his post, Cameron and his ilk are not elected to rule and dictate to us, they are supposed to listen to and represent the views of we, the people – and it is to achieve the latter that the Harrogate Agenda was conceived.

 

2012
07/13

Category:
David's Musings

TAG:


COMMENTS:
2 Comments »

Harrogate ‘Sitrep’ (1)

Having arrived in Harrogate (safely, bearing in mind it is ‘Friday 13th’) and dropping The Boiling Frog off at the Swan Hotel where he was being ‘picked up’ by his father (free accommodation for some!) I ‘checked in’ at my guest house (The Belmont – superb room, if anyone ever stays in Harrogate and needs accommodation) and then returned to the Swan Hotel to share, in the lounge, a bevy or two with TBF – sorely needed after 4 hours (mainly on the M1) during which, for those that have been following the discussion twixt TBF and I on the demerits of representative democracy, the subject was not once raised! To show that no animosity existed on my part, having stopped about ‘half-way’ during the journey in order to stretch my legs and to partake in the obligatory ‘fag-break’, I even bought him a cup of tea. Let no-one ever say I bear a grudge!

Lo and behold, who was sitting behind us in the lounge but Richard North! (well spotted, TBF!) He, having introduced us to Richard, ensured that a most congenial and informative conversation followed, aided and abetted with an obligatory glass or two of our chosen tipple. We were joined, during the course of our conversation, by some of the attendees who I will not mention in case they wish to remain incognito.

Not having anyone to cook me dinner I was forced to walk the streets of Harrogate and discovered a restaurant by the name of “Jakes” (Italian cuisine) where I enjoyed a most excellent  repast of tomato with basil soup, followed by fresh sea bass and accompanied by a glass of white (just the one in view of the fact that it had been preceded by a pint of lager and three Famous Grouse!).

 

 

Older Entries

Hosted By PDPS Internet Hosting

© Witterings from Witney 2012