The EU expands further

Quote:

Prime Minister, Ted Heath when he said in a Government White Paper of July 1971, “There is no question of any erosion of essential national sovereignty”. (On a TV current affairs programme in 1990, he was asked if he had known that this statement was untrue. His answer was “Of course, yes”.)

There is a bit of history to this idea of politicians lying to the public to achieve what is supposed to be a noble end, a phenomenon we see on both sides of the pond. In the 1880s a group of wealthy English met in a private home in London to discuss how best to implement socialism and eliminate Christianity (which stands in the way). The group included Karl Marx’s sister, just to give you an idea of the ideology they represented.

They met later a number of times and eventually settled on a name for themselves: The Fabian Society, after a Roman general who had successfully used stealth to gain victory, thereby saving lives. They would do likewise, preferring stealth to usurp power over the violence used later in Russia.

But is stealth necessarily harmless?

Suppose you stop your car and ask me directions to a place. I direct you over a bridge, which happens to have collapsed in a recent hurricane. I tell you that it is narrow, so in order to avoid meeting another vehicle, you should speed up as you approach it. You do so and plunge to your death in the canyon below.

I didn’t harm you directly. But I caused you great violence through my stealthy and false directions.

So it is with the EU. It was sold as a community of states that would contribute to economic stability and greater harmony in Europe. No sovereignty would be lost and there would be a net gain for all.

But this community is now called a union and is a de facto empire with central control and almost no participation of the populace, with formidable power, ever-expanding boundaries (see Sonya Porter’s article below), a court, one of the largest bureaucracies in the world, and a growing military, and its economic policies are leading, by socialist wealth redistribution, to what is expected by many economists to be the greatest economic crisis of our age.

The Soviet Union has been reborn.

Don Hank

 

Sonya Jay Porter on the ever-expanding, rarely-asking EU

The creation of a European union of states was considered a noble aspiration following the destruction of the continent in two world wars. First proposed in the Schuman Declaration of 1950 by the then-French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman, it aimed to transform Europe through a “step-by-step” process, leading to the unification of Europe and so ensuring that the individual nations of Europe should never go to war with one other again. But although senior politicians may have been aware of the gradual subsuming of their countries into a Federal Europe, most of their populations were not.

In Britain, for instance FCO 30/1048 which was written in 1971 by civil servants at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office but only brought to light in 2001 under the 30 year rule, shows that the FCO was definitely aware of the gradual loss of Britain’s sovereignty that entry into the Common Market would entail. However, introducing the 1972 Bill, Geoffrey Rippon, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, said “there would be no essential surrender of sovereignty” and this was echoed by the Prime Minister, Ted Heath when he said in a Government White Paper of July 1971, “There is no question of any erosion of essential national sovereignty”. (On a TV current affairs programme in 1990, he was asked if he had known that this statement was untrue. His answer was “Of course, yes”.) So it would be unwise to take what the EU authorities say at face value, including the fact that it is a strictly European union of nations or that any other countries brought into its fold would be there simply as trading partners.

Turkey is not a member of the European Union, and may never be. Yet on 30th March 2012, the members of the European Commission (who are appointed by the governments of member states rather than elected) quietly decided to grant Turkish citizens the same residency and labour rights as full members of the Union.

This accord will apply to Turkish workers who are or have been legally employed in the territory of a member state and who are or who have been subject to the legislation of one or more member states, and their survivors; to the members of the family of workers referred to above, provided that these family members are or have been legally resident with the worker concerned while the worker is employed in a member state. The text reads:

“It follows from Article 12 of the Agreement establishing an association between the European Economic Community and Turkey (the Ankara Agreement) and Article 36 of the Additional Protocol to the Ankara Agreement (the Additional Protocol) that freedom of movement for workers between the Union and Turkey is to be secured by progressive stages.”

It adds,

“This proposal is part of a package of proposals which includes similar proposals with regard to the Agreements with Albania, Montenegro and San Marino. A first package with similar proposals in respect of Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Israel was adopted by the Council in October 2010.”

As a mark of their devotion to openness and transparency, the following laconic note appears under the heading “Consultation of interested parties” –

“There was no need for external expertise.”

Later still, the following difficult-to-believe statement appears:

“The proposal has no implications for the Union budget.”

Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Israel are not in the EU but many of their citizens will now be allowed to live in, and benefit from, EU countries – which could cause many problems, not least that of how the EU is going to cope with yet more unemployed at a time when the Union’s financial situation is so parlous.

Read more:

http://www.quarterly-review.org/?p=919

 

Opposing the tyrant while drinking his Kool-Aid

You can’t have it both ways. Either you want to stop the tyrant or you want to assist him.

 

by Don Hank

 

Pat Condell has a unique way with language, as a recent video shows.

Look at this delightful phrase: ” [the EU]…will collapse under the weight of its own illegitimacy.”

It occurs to me that, due to their opposition to tyranny, atheists like Pat are actually in the same boat as biblical Christians, though seemingly at opposite poles, and our plight —  as well as our tragic inability to grasp it — is as described by Martin Niemöller in that famous quote

“In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist…[etc]”

A sincere and questioning mind will, absent bias and external obstructions, come round to the truth. Atheism can be a painful first step in questioning received wisdom, but it may never be the last.

National unity means joining in common cause with everyone who opposes the common enemy, at least in the opposition to that enemy and until he is vanquished. There are no superiors or inferiors in that struggle, just people yearning for their share of the rights and voice that are rightfully theirs. Their God-given rights as we say. The term “God-given” may offend some people with claims to “higher enlightenment,” but consider that it was precisely the notion that man can create rights out of thin air that gave birth to the despotic EU — just as the corollary notion that central banks – part of that same entity — can create money out of thin air contributed mightily to our current financial malaise. Those perverse ideas are twins.

I doubt it has ever occurred to Pat that his militant atheism is part of the cultural Marxism that has been foisted on Europe for generations by the very elites he rails against. After all, the Fabian Society was founded (in London) for a twofold purpose:

1. to spread socialism, and

2. to eliminate Judeo-Christian culture.

Today’s elites are the spiritual and ideological heirs to that agenda, and yet, many of their putative opponents are unwittingly assisting them in their quest to destroy our Western culture and heritage by assailing Judeo-Christianity.

Pat is part of our landscape, his words are too powerful to ignore, and he is absolutely right that the EU has stolen from Europeans. But he needs to understand that opposing only the political agenda of the Imperial Powers he rails against is an incomplete task — even a futile one — unless we oppose their social agenda as well. Opposition to the enemy’s destructiveness is a vital first step. Railing against constructive faith that ultimately can replace what that agenda has torn asunder negates that opposition.

This is because a vital second step is restoring what the enemy has destroyed, and the will to restore it comes in no small measure from our inner spiritual resources invested in a common vision of national health and prosperity.

The myth that atheism was a vital component of the Enlightenment is false. There were in fact two Enlightenments, one that sought to reconcile the thought of Aristotle, for example, with Christianity, as Lawrence de Medici had done in Florence, and the other Enlightenment – embodied, for example, by Voltaire, which taught that religion itself had held back progress and needed to be abolished. Devotees of the latter branch cite, by way of support, the difficulties that some scientists like Copernicus and Galileo, have encountered with the Vatican. Yet they seem unaware that Roger Bacon’s pioneering work on the scientific method was in fact sponsored by Pope Clement IV.

Those spiritual resources we will need to rebuild our civilization once the enemy is overcome are, to paraphrase Pat, like the air we breathe and the water we drink.

We can’t afford to throw this baby out with the bath water.

http://kleinverzet.blogspot.com/2011/11/dose-of-cold-hard-truth.html

A gulag of your own making

And now they’re coming for you

 

Don Hank

 

Matt. 25:45 Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

A few weeks ago, PayPal cut off service to Julio Severo because Julio says on his blog that he agrees with the New Testament on homosexual behavior. They did this at the behest of a homosexual activist group.

Effectively, PayPal, as the only service of its kind, unilaterally decided to try and ban Julio’s blog, which has played a key role in stopping utterly totalitarian-style legislation in Brazil that would have banned speech perceived as offensive to homosexuals. Since PayPal is effectively a monopoly, they have threatened Julio’s livelihood in objection to his faith, which they want to see banned everywhere in the world.

PayPal is therefore what I call a NGE, or Non-Governmental Enforcer, of an unconstitutional speech code, circumventing the law by using methods that would be politically impossible for government to use.
And yet you will note that government has been glaringly silent and will do nothing to help Julio barring a lawsuit. And it is far from clear whether our leftist-packed judiciary will do anything to intervene on behalf of freedom of speech.

Now, not much fuss was made over Julio’s plight outside Christian activist circles, apparently because religious freedom is now being supplanted in Western minds by sexual freedom, a favorite platform of libertarians.

Yet, I have tried to warn that when you allow government (or its proxy) to tell Christians they may not speak out against what they perceive as evil, the totalitarian system will soon direct its fury against you, in what could be called the “Niemöller effect,” even if the government per se is not directly involved in this assault. Because you see, the far left (as exemplified by the Fabian Society, which has lost no time in stealthily removing your freedom since the 1880s) has always used stealth tactics to enforce laws, even laws not yet on the books. They believe they are on the side of History, and I write that with a cap because for them history is God.

Now, the West has gradually accepted the mindset that religion is nothing but a throwback and has no place in public life. In fact, they portray Christianity as a sinister system designed to enslave people. Yet when large corporations in league with corrupt government (crony capitalism) overtly take steps to eradicate Christian speech in public, then those liberty-minded individuals who generally ignore the plight of Christians, also considering us to be knuckle dragging Neanderthals, are unwittingly cutting their own throats, because if groups of bullies can tell Christians to shut up with impunity, then they can tell you to shut up as well. It is only a matter of time.

A few scant weeks have passed since PayPal censored Christian blogger Julio Severo and now, those who sat silently by are seeing the censors moving into their own territory. For libertarians generally believe that any censorship is bad and cuts into liberty. Yet, as suggested above, they foolishly look away when Christians are censored, particularly Christians who flout the Ruling Class purportedly on the “side of history.” What they fail to see is that the censorship of Christian speech is a harbinger of much bigger things to come. Because the Ruling Class despises Judeo-Christian values (as exemplified by their behavior in Europe where they import Christian-hating Muslims by the millions, and in the Muslim World, where each war they engage in invariably has the outcome of Christian persecution and decimation of the indigenous Christian populations).

This lack of compassion for Christian speech on the part of the “freedom minded,” including numerous nominal Christians, is a classic example of the “Niemöller Syndrome” as expressed in the famous statement by Christian leader Martin Niemöller:

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist
.”

And then he goes on to say they came for the social democrats, and then the trade unionists, the Jews and so on and he said nothing each time and then finally:
“When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.”

We are at that point now, my friend. You didn’t speak out for Julio because you bought into the left’s propaganda that only homosexuals can be victims, never Christians. The far left in league with the New World Order taught you that Christianity is the enemy of freedom and compassion, when in fact it represents the only real freedom and compassion one can ever hope to have.

Now we are here:

http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2011/10/25/248252/Wikileaks-turns-to-fundraising-as-US-finance-companies-cut-off.htm

He [Assange] claims that since Wikileaks began publishing thousands of secret US government files and diplomatic cables online, an “arbitrary and unlawful financial blockade” has been imposed by Bank of America, Visa, MasterCard, PayPal and Western Union.

Each and every one of those corporations are nothing more nor less than partners in an unholy alliance with the most radical political apparatus we have ever seen in America. Along with many others, I had said many times before that there is no longer free market capitalism in America.

But loss of economic freedom is never alone. Loss of religious freedom and loss of political freedom are never far behind.

We are now officially in that latter phase when the right to freedom of speech has been abridged and soon will be completely abolished unless you and I have a change of heart.

Did Assange complain when Julio Severo was cruelly denied a living for his family, including 4 children?

I didn’t hear his protests.

And I didn’t hear yours either when WorldNetDaily alerted you to this outrage.

So don’t protest when they muzzle you and take away your voice and your vote.

Welcome to Gulag America, a prison of your own making, through your silent complicity.

 

Relevant:

http://laiglesforum.com/will-you-help-this-borther/2693.htm

http://laiglesforum.com/did-paypal-aid-and-abett-child-porn-sellers/2721.htm

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=346825

 

Moral Keynesianism and the war on drugs

The government is waging a war on you, not on drugs

Don Hank

First, if you have an opinion on the legalization of narcotics, let us know at the link below (but please make sure you have read the associated articles on this, and note in particular the article — the first in the Anglo-Saxon world — showing that the “Portuguese model” is based on false reports):

http://laiglesforum.com/ideology-bound-libertarians-look-a-lot-like-leftists/2620.htm

I have not ever seen this much passion, on both sides of an issue, as I am seeing at this site. I want to thank those who participated or will participate. Note: If you are new to the forum, your post will take time for approval (I am not here all the time). Please check back later.

Let me try to sum up my position:

My main thrust is not so much whether we “have a right to do with my body as I please.” That is just too adolescent for me. Sorry.

My position is independent of whether we are winning or losing the “war on drugs.”

My position is that the Left is planning another sneak attack on the West, just as it did in the 60s when it sold us the sexual revolution. As some will recall, the whole “revolution” seemed like a grass roots movement. It was planned to seem that way. But it came off the Left’s drawing board. The Frankfurt school specialized in “education” (read: social Marxist propaganda) was heavily invested in that movement, famously promulgating the slogan “make love, not war.”

The method was Fabian stealth, and if you have investigated the origins of the Fabian Society in London, in the 1880s, you will recall that there was an essentially two-pronged assault:

1— Destroy the Christian roots of the West (that’s been accomplished)

2— Subtly program people to accept Marxian socialism, or in other words, communism (that is right around the corner. Even euroskeptics as a group are not necessarily inclined to oppose socialism as long as it is a national kind. Where have we heard of that before? Oh, yes, Nationalsozialismus. I had almost forgotten).

Then there were academic reports and news items and editorials hyping what amounted to a moral breakdown. Today there are stories like the wholly contrived report of the “successful” Portuguese model as reported by the Cato Institute and later in Scientific American, but debunked by the Portuguese doctors.

Let me suggest that what we are now accepting if we accept legalization of narcotics is in effect a kind of “moral Keynesianism.” Now Keynesianism is the economic teaching that the economy needs government to thrive and, more specifically, needs governments to do things that are counterintuitive and contrary to common sense and logic, such as “stimulating” the economy by spending tax payer money on projects, whether necessary ones or not (John Maynard Keynes once famously stated that if workers were hired by the government to dig ditches and then fill them up again, that would stimulate the economy. That one statement encapsulates all we need to know about this “scholar”).

This idea was tried by FDR, and historians at the time failed to note that it was not the “stimulus” (in the form of war spending) that got us out of the Great Depression but rather a robust and resilient essentially free economic system and strong moral fabric along with a strong manufacturing base thanks to a still-dormant China and finally, a very limited entitlement system. Calculations by a group of UCLA economists show that, far from “getting us out of the depression,” FDR actually slowed the recovery by about 7 years.

So, long story short, Keynesianism is harmful to economies. That is bad news for us today because most US presidents of both parties, and most famously Obama and Bush (who promoted TARP and the bank bailouts), have operated on the premise that shoveling enormous amounts of public money into the economy speeds recovery and is generally beneficial to everyone. European “leaders” did likewise, despite the total lack of evidence that such Keyenesian policies help and the strong evidence (not to mention common sense and logic) showing they are harmful.

In its broadest sense, Keynesianism is a teaching analogous to the old expression “a little hair of the dog that bit you.” This is the belief held by hard drinkers and alcoholics that consuming a little alcohol the morning after will cure your hangover. It is merely an excuse to follow your compulsion to harm your body even more because you don’t have the self discipline to stop. In other words, it is the counterintuitive degradation of any system (body, economy, etc) in the hope of deriving benefit from this degradation.

So in fact, Keynesianism goes far beyond economics and has seeped into our psyche in every area vital to life and to a healthy society. This is because Keynesianism as an academic teaching was only the effect, not the cause, of this widespread belief in doing the wrong thing to achieve a benefit. Moral bankruptcy does not need Keynesianism to proceed. Keynesianism is only a catalyst that speeds the reaction. Not surprisingly, John Maynard Keynes was himself a drug user (BTW, I am not the first to liken Keyenesianism to drug addiction. It’s been done here).

The notion that legalizing drugs will somehow help reduce drug use belongs in the category of moral Keyenesianism.  As I have shown here and  here, while libertarians and the Left present reports of drug models based on legalization (first Holland, and then when that went sour, Portugal) purporting to show legalization of narcotics as beneficial, the reports are patently false – analogously to historical treatises purporting to show that FDR “got us out” of the Great Depression.

Now, let me clarify my position on the War on Drugs.

This is a patently phony war and, like all conflicts in which the US has been involved since WW II, the government does not sincerely intend to win it.

This is as plain as the nose on your face. How in heaven’s name could any nation hope to stop the sale and use of narcotics by keeping open the border with the country through which the lion’s share of these drugs pass into ours? Despite the hype, we have not sincerely tried to close the border. Quite the opposite. While hypocritically condemning the cartels, the US government has in fact opened the doors to them and their product. As reported by Fox News, there are no less than 5 federal lands at the Mexican border that have travel warnings in place to alert travelers of possible violence. From that report:

Dennis Godfrey, a spokesman for the Bureau of Land Management’s Arizona office, said roughly a dozen signs were posted earlier this month along the Sonoran Desert National Monument advising that travel in the area is not recommended due to “active drug and human” smuggling.

It should be abundantly clear that the US government, which so far has not hesitated to spend well over $1 trillion on wars that have failed their mission of bringing lasting peace or democracy to the Middle East, refuses to spend even a fraction of that to build adequate fencing and hire enough border patrol agents and/or national guard personnel to stop the flow of drugs.

Ladies and Gentlemen, please read this carefully:

The US government does not want to stop or slow the flow of drugs into the US. Most lawmakers and presidents (all of them) only want to make a show, do a bare minimum in an effort to placate constituencies.

They are thumbing their noses at their constituents while catering to the corrupt Mexican government and the cartels, which are their main clients in this illegal and immoral enterprise.

And now that their failure is manifest, they are subtly suggesting that, instead of doing the rational thing and closing the border, we need to legalize drugs, thereby expanding the market for their friends, these vicious killers selling a dangerous product that destroys our people and our children.

Here comes the avalanche. Open your eyes before it is too late. Don’t let them flatter you into the thought that legalization was your idea. It most certainly was not.

Finally, for my European readers:

Do you really believe the EU or any European nation wants to stop the flow of drugs into your region? Here in Latin America, it is common knowledge that Spain and Portugal are the portals for drug traffic in Europe. I believe that your airports have so far been successful in preventing terrorist attacks. How is it possible that they are not also stopping the flow of drugs into your country? Here is something to ponder: Portugal is not only a major drug flow artery into Europe, it is also the only nation to have legalized narcotic use. Is there a possible connection here that ought to be explored? That is, if Portugal is winking at drug use, then it may have been winking for many years at drug smugglers passing through their airports. Just a little food for thought.

Again, if you have an opinion on the legalization of narcotics, let us know here:

http://laiglesforum.com/ideology-bound-libertarians-look-a-lot-like-leftists/2620.htm

Will Muslim Africa join the EU?

Millions of Muslims  live in Europe but refuse to integrate. The EU wants even more. And now, Muslims countries to join the EU?

by Don Hank

There has been much speculation as to the reasons for the US and NATO interfering in the internal affairs of Libya, the US and the rest of the West interfering in Egypt, the UN taking sides in an election dispute in the Ivory Coast and using deadly force to install the Muslim candidate, while doing nothing to stop the slaughter of 1,000 Christians, etc.

There is the old knee-jerk accusation that it is all about oil. Yet Egypt has almost no oil. Neither does the Ivory Coast.

Remember that the EU has been importing Muslims into Europe at the rate of almost a million a year and a realistic estimate forecasts a Muslim majority in about 15-25 years in that continent.

Also recall that the Fabian Society (of which Bush pal Tony Blair is a member) was founded in the 1880s for the purpose of spreading socialism worldwide, and one of their immediate goals was to eliminate Christianity. Now do you suppose engineering a Muslim majority may help achieve that goal?

Also recall that every major conflict in the Middle East since the Iraq invasion has resulted in the murder, exile and/or persecution of indigenous Christian populations that were protected until the West got involved!

This is all circumstantial evidence, you say.

But for many years, an expansion of the EU into Africa has been in the works, and now a high-ranking EU official is recommending “deep and broad” integration with Africa, ostensibly to expand the EU “market.” This means, long-term, that African nations are now to be integrated into the EU. Which in turn means that eventually the Schengen agreement (open borders) would be extended to Islamic Africa.

Remember that the EU started out as an innocent little agreement (the EEC, European Economic Community – with the emphasis ostensibly on the market), then morphed into the EC (European Community — note that “economic” is no longer the focus, not even part of the name), and now is a supranational government whose top ranking officers (the European Commission) are not even elected. We used to call that kind of arrangement a dictatorship. We also used to call the kind of wealth redistribution policies this government practices communism.

My, how times have changed. Good thing communism is “dead.”

The EU’s William Hague wants to “broaden and deepen” ties with N. Africa:

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2011/05/william-hague-argues-for-broad-and-deep-economic-integration-between-the-middle-east-and-the-eu.html

Sarkozy has wanted Mediterranean Union:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/10/world/europe/10iht-france.4.5656114.html

Milan court sentences Google officials to prison for posting whistleblowing video

Milan court sentences Google officials to prison for whistle-blowing video

I have shown before that the internet is very much under attack in Europe, which now completely controls it. Censorship-happy Europe is the very worst place to be controlling your freedom of speech.

The world elites are stealing our freedom incrementally by stealth, just as they have been doing for the last century since the founding of the Marxist Fabian Society in England.

Now some Google officials have been sentenced to prison in Europe for allowing the posting of a video clip showing a boy with Down’s syndrome being abused by a group of students. It was hardly what anyone would call graphic or violent footage but it was a good excuse for censorship that could not be left to go to waste.

The group Vividown brought suit and the judge sentenced the Google officials to prison based on an alleged violation of the victim’s privacy. Nota bene: There is no mention of any trial against the perpetrators. Clearly, no one is portraying them in a bad light.

Anyone who expects to be able to use the Internet freely from here on out is not paying attention.

There are at least 2 reasons why the court (in Milan) accepted the suit and issued this incredibly draconian sentence, not on the perpetrators of the abuse but on those who dared to make it public:

1–The elites need to keep progressing toward total control of the Internet until they control it just as tightly as they do the “mainstream” press. Otherwise the masses may eventually break free and demand a say in the governments of their nations.

2–The only way illegal activity can continue unabated is by censoring the evidence — in this case, the video showing children harassing a handicapped boy. The real issue is the violation of the boy’s rights and in a common-sense traditional world, the courts and press would be focusing on the perpetrators and demanding they be punished.

But those days are gone. In the increasingly autocratic EU and in the individual governments of Europe, corruption abounds and officials are routinely getting away with misdemeanors and crimes. Those who take steps to expose them and bring them to justice are attacked in the media in subtle ways designed to make the unsuspecting public believe that telling the truth was somehow a criminal violation of their privacy rights. Thanks to distortions in the press, the issue becomes one of how whistleblowers violate people’s “rights” by telling the truth about perpetrators and abusers of human rights. Attention is diverted away from the perpetrators and toward those who exposed them. Readers are gently persuaded to accept the notion that committing crimes or violating human rights is of little consequence, but that exposing a perpetrator is a criminal violation of privacy.

Think about it. If this new policy of trying and punishing the ones who report crimes under color of “protecting the victim” and ignoring or downplaying the perpetrators is pursued to its logical end, anyone who reports on a crime in detail in the media, particularly by showing images of graphic crime scenes or battered victims, can be considered to have violated the rights of the victim and can be given jail time, thereby trivializing the actual crime itself and inevitably paving the way for increased criminality. At the very least, in a reversal of technological advances, the presentation of videotaped evidence against perpetrators of crimes and misdemeanors would not only be inadmissable (as is sometimes the case already), but in fact would be punishable in some cases by harsher penalties than the crimes it was attempting to expose!

The following site (also from Europe — UK in this case) provides an important hint as to why the elites think it is important to make the whistleblowers appear to be the bad guy in order to cover up for high-ranking perpetrators:

http://video.aol.co.uk/video-detail/hollie-greig-scandal-talk-by-robert-green-1-of-5flv/153578043

So far, America has not fallen quite this far, thanks in large part to the Internet. But if the European elites can succeed in censoring the Internet throughout the world, it can easily happen here as well, even eventually becoming the norm. (In case you missed the news, control of the Internet was transferred from the US to Europe last year, and since then, the attacks on our freedom have been substantial).

Thus, in order to protect high-ranking evil doers and dictatorial policies, the Internet as we know it is being attacked like never before! They can’t afford to have you know the truth.

Europe has long been a dictatorship — where the people now have almost no say in any of the lawmaking process or choice of lawmakers or judges — but sadly, few Europeans realize it. Most are under the influence of the sensational media which keep them dazzled by images of glamorous stars and athletes, cats rescued by firemen, “global climate crisis” and the latest cinematic achievements.

We will see more and more of this censorship and down-dumbing as time goes on. The pretext is privacy, but the real issue is freedom of speech. The use of Down’s syndrome as an excuse to censor is a new and creative one. Just wait. There will be thousands of such excuses and each one will seem “justified” to the uninitiated who fail to understand what is going on behind the scenes.

But legal censorship isn’t the only way to silence sites like this one. Recently, the far-left site Tecnorati condemned Laigle’s Forum as “neo-nazi” for the article “Enjoy the internet while you can.” Other than mention of an anonymous report, no reason was given for this, but my best guess is that I had mentioned in the article that the far-left Frankfurt School was founded by a group of Jewish German Marxists who came to the US in the early 30s to avoid the impending Holocaust. My use of the word “Jewish” is no-doubt deemed anti-Semitic by the hypersensitive tecno rats, and this pretext is no different from the use of Down’s syndrome as an excuse to go after whistleblowers. Of course, if I hadn’t mentioned they were Jewish, the reader would have been left wondering why a group of Germans would be fleeing before the impending holocaust, so the use of the word was clearly not racist. Besides, I didn’t say anything negative about them, only that they were intent on destroying traditional American culture, and that’s a positive for the far left, so what’s the problem?

But the point is: for a group of Marxist activists desperate to censor, any excuse will do.

There is very little time left for the public to wake up in time to save what is left of the New Media from the wolves.

Enjoy it while you can. Or better yet, help save it by spreading the word.

Don Hank

European censorship

http://laiglesforum.com/2009/10/13/you-can-help-stop-world-dictatorship/

http://laiglesforum.com/2009/10/16/the-eu-wants-unlimited-fines-for-christian-speech/

The rotten fruits of the “carbon credit” scam

The notion of “global warming” has been used to introduce perhaps the biggest tax in history, and one of the avenues for this tax was so-called “carbon offsets” or “carbon credits.”

Fortunately, the American people have not completely fallen for this scam as yet. But the UK, which has long labored under the heavy hand of two essentially foreign governments — their “own” out-of-touch “leaders” and the EU — has had little choice. Almost none of the elected leaders in the UK there are in touch with the people, who are increasingly aware that they are being scammed on a grand scale. (While serving as the head of state, Tony Blair was also the head of the Fabian Socitey, whose avowed purpose is to undermine democracy and introduce Marxism — Karl Marx’s sister was one of the founders).

Now please pay attention: America now faces the same choices as they once did: either we go it alone as the exceptional nation we have been or we take that same turn into oblivion and let the “elites” take us over. So far we have done a terrible job of maintaining our sovereignty and our representative government. Many “conservatives” and even the somewhat more enlightened Tea Party people have fallen for the RINO neocon scam in MA, where Scott Brown was presented as a “conservative”. CPAC portrayed Scott, Mitt Romney and other RINOs the same way, although, to the credit of the attendees, in a poll taken by CPAC, Romney lost to Ron Paul — a sign that the leadership of groups like this is no longer calling the shots.  A McCain loss in his Senate campaign in Arizona would be a further sign that even without any higher-up leadership, the grassroots can now make up its own mind.

Our heads are very slowly emerging from the sand, but there are a lot of GOP die-hards out there who keep longing for the “good old days” of the globalist, open-borders GW Bush administration. They haven’t quite figured it out yet.

The press release appearing below is one of the most amazing but likewise, one if the saddest, pieces  of news Laigle’s Forum has ever received from an independent source.

It is in fact the fulfillment of what WND’s Jerome Corsi had foreseen and written about earlier (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=118953). It shows not only the extent of the criminal activity of the world elites but also the extent to which they will go to hush up their activities.

The sender, the assistant to Nigel Farage, founder of the UK Independent Party (UKIP), one of the most outspoken voices in Europe and a man who has consistently opposed the European Union dictatorship — even from his position as a Member of Parliament in the EU, sent out the press release immediately after dictating it, showing the outrageous consequences of “carbon credits.”

To sum it up, 1 billion pounds sterling  in carbon credits were given to an Indian-owned UK steelworks so that the plant could be closed down — ostensibly to save the world from the emissions caused by this plant — leaving 1,700 workers jobless. And here is the rub: in Robin-Hood fashion, the cool billion of UK taxpayer money will be invested in steel plants in India, where no one believes in the “carbon offset” schemes and where the emissions will continue unabated, with nothing of the stated goal being accomplished.  The net result is an enormous transfer of wealth by Fabian-style stealth from a “rich” (but soon to be poor if the elites have their way) country to a developing country. I hope you understand that the end game of the elites is to “spread the wealth around” as Obama told Joe the Plumber he would do. It has nothing whatsoever to do with saving the planet or anything else. It is like Chicago-style power politics on a world scale.

It is vitally important for us to be aware that all globalists and globablist organizations (like the CFR) want only to spread the wealth, Marxist style. They do not want prosperity for you or your children and, as evidenced hereinbelow, they could care less about the environment or “global warming.”  And here is the smoking gun in Mr. Nigel Farage’s press release, as dictated to his secretary.

Don Hank

Sir

Corus’ steelworks at Redcar, near Middlesborough, “Teesside Cast Products”, is to be closed (“mothballed” is the euphemism)  It is Britain’s last great steelworks and an essential national resource. Without it, we are at the world’s mercy.

Corus is owned by Tata Steel of India.   Recently, Tata received “EU-carbon-credits” worth up to £1bn, ostensibly so that steel-production at Redcar would not be crippled by the EU’s “carbon-emissions-trading-scheme”.  By closing the plant at Redcar – and not making any “carbon-emissions” – Tata walks off with £1bn of taxpayers’ money, which it will invest in its steel-factories in India, where there is no “carbon-emissions-trading-scheme”.

There’s more.  The EU’s “emissions-trading-scheme” (ETS) is modelled on instructions from the “International Panel on Climate-Change” (IPCC) of the United Nations Organisation. The Chairman of the IPCC is one Dr Rajendra K.Pachauri, a former railway-engineer, who obtained this post by virtue of his being Chairman of the “Tata Energy-Research Institute” – set up by Tata Steel.

UKIP’s leader in the EU’s “parliament”, Nigel Farage, revealed these data in a speech at Strasbourg, on 10th February, and was due to appear in the BBC’s “Question-Time” programme, from Middlesborough, on 18th February, where the closure of the Redcar-plant was inevitably discussed.  Almost at the last minute, his invitation to join the “Question-Time” panel was cancelled, without explanation.

An article, on the subject, by Neil Hamilton, which was due to appear in this week’s Sunday Express, has also been “pulled”.

 Yours etc

 

On another note, please let us know what you think of the below-linked post “Enjoy the internet while you can.” For example, is there anything offensive in the way it is written? Please let us know either by sending us a note at zoilandon@msn.com or by adding a comment at the bottom of this latest post “The rotten fruits of…”

Thank you!

http://laiglesforum.com/2010/02/04/enjoy-the-internet-while-you-can/

Further reading 

Climate change hoax:

http://laiglesforum.com/2010/02/10/1181/

http://laiglesforum.com/2010/02/04/global-warming-takes-hit-take-action-on-dod-pro-homo-policy/

http://laiglesforum.com/2009/11/30/the-real-climate-conference-in-copenhagen/

European Union as dictatorship:

http://laiglesforum.com/2008/03/25/government-by-deception/

http://laiglesforum.com/europe-a-dictatorship/

Freedom threatened:

http://laiglesforum.com/2009/08/31/816/

http://laiglesforum.com/2008/11/26/america-in-full-suicide-mode/

The EU wants unlimited fines for Christian speech

EU targets Christianity and free speech

I have sometimes heard American conservatives say that what happens in other parts of the world is of no consequence to us. They get impatient with those of us who look at what is happening in Europe and say “well, they made their bed. Now they must lie in it.”

While it is true that our founders spoke against “entangling alliances” and we should have avoided such a long time ago, the fact remains that the US and Europe are virtually joined at the hip thanks to the alliances our past leaders have established. And thanks in no small part to the blindness of voters in the last presidential election.

Thus we see the European Union poised to destroy Christian speech in what appears to be an imitation of the ACLU this side of the Atlantic. But it is not. Though no monolith, the Left eyes the same ends everywhere. The Fabian Socialists in the UK (Tony Blair was a prominent one) and the Frankfurt School from Germany (now firmly implanted in the US) have the same end: eradicate our culture and replace it with a leftist one in which a self-elected Big Brother decides what we may and may not say and do.

Why should I care what happens in Europe, you say?

The EU is using the same tactics to achieve its ends and has the same goals as our Left. That goal is a one-world leftist government.

Therefore, what happens in Europe will happen here if it has not already, so at the very least, it is a barometer. But worse, the EU is already extending its tentacles to other places. There have been proposals within the EU to widen its reach to Africa and the Middle East. Turkish membership is already being discussed.

And German Justice Minister Brigitte Zypries has already called for German control of the internet and the adoption of the German legal system throughout the world. In case you didn’t know, German courts and legislators have all but banned home schooling and have banned “hate” speech on the internet and in public. A pastor was jailed there for preaching an anti-abortion sermon. Frau Zypries has said she wants us to follow suit. Sweden seems to be perfectly  willing.

Anyone daring to say current politicians in Germany are like nazis is violating the law prohibiting the “trivializing of the holocaust.” So if you think the nazilike politicians are nazilike, better keep it to yourself. (I won’t travel to Germany and I believe a travel boycott is warranted. Maybe that is a subject for another post).

At some point, American leftists will make a bid for one-world government, something that US presidents of both parties, now including Obama, and the EU, the UN and the IMF have been quietly working toward for years, including a worldwide currency to replace the dollar.

The Obama government has said it does not want a good crisis to go to waste. Clearly, both parties, which have long been in the hands of one-world advocates (most presidents have been Council on Foreign Relations members, who are indoctrinated to believe that a one-world government is inevitable and desirable for world peace), and the goal will be the same as in the EU.

The EU started out as an economic entity too, supposedly concerned only with creating a giant market place where goods could travel freely, unfettered by trade barriers.

But from the very outset, this economic focus was only part of a bait and switch scheme. The bait is now gone and the switch is in place. The EU now is telling courts and legislatures all over Europe what they can and must do, and as you will read below, the results are a bit on the totalitarian side. This brings us to another implication for the US: beware multinational efforts like NAFTA.

Ireland was a holdout for years, having voted No in a referendum. But the EU insiders pretended to make a few changes to mollify the Irish and called for a new referendum so that the Irish could vote Yes on the supposedly“new”Lisbon Treaty concerning a EU constitution. But the Irish were duped. The “changes” were minimal to non-existent, but the actual document – though hyped by the elite — was more inaccessible to voters than the Health Care bill was to the US public.

And did you notice something?: If Ireland got to vote twice, shouldn’t the other member nations get that opportunity?

Of course. The fact that they don’t is clear evidence that this is pure snake oil.

There is nothing even remotely democratic about having nay voters vote again and again until the elites get the result they want but not allowing yea voters to do the same. Further, groups in the UK and Germany are saying it was illegal. The EU apparently illegally invested public monies from the member states in promoting the Yes vote in Ireland. And Jose Manuel Barroso, the President of the EU Commission, also went to Ireland on the tax payers’ dime, in violation of the EU’s own rules. This was supposed to be an internal affair but the unsuspecting Irish were dragged into it by a foreign power.

The only holdout today is Czech President Vaclav Klaus, one of the most brilliant men in Europe, who sees through the hype but is being pressured by the EU and member countries to sign the Lisbon treaty.

All of the above-described shenanigans reflect the way Obamacare is being rammed down our throats.

What does the EU teach us?

I think the main lesson is that the Fabian socialists are winning the world through stealth. They are, de facto, achieving their ends of world domination by “democratic” means. How did they do it? The churches went along, the Vatican went along, the “conservative” politicians went along, and now they are dragging the people along behind them. And many of the people are still under the delusion that this is all to their benefit. But a growing number smell a rat.

And note something curious:
While the EU, like American Democrats and RINOs, are using the “gay” issues like gay marriage, and immigrants of the Muslim faith to gin up sympathy for “victim” groups and thereby develop an artificial pretext for their anti-Christian schemes,
ironically, Russia, once the bastion of the Left, is not having any of this and hardly goes along with any of the EU’s schemes.

A few years back, the mayor of Moscow banned a proposed “gay” parade and made a few arrests when a few hardy souls decided to stage it anyway.

And about a year ago, the Russian Orthodox Prelate made a speech before the EU and told them that Europe lacks morality. He also complained to EU Commission President Barroso of Christian persecution in Europe.

If the mad rush to self destruction can’t be stopped from within, our traditional enemy may become an ally at some point and may become the last holdout for traditional Christianity.

And the first shall be last and the last shall be first.

Don Hank

The EU wants unlimited fines for Christian speech

By Graham Wood

I am writing today in regard to the latest example of proposed legislation, which can only be described as horrific, which will be coming forward.   Needless to say it is an EU “directive”.

What is a directive?

A directive emanating from the EU must pass into legislation in an EU member state, although there is some freedom to adapt to national culture and circumstances. Note, however, that such is the sheer scale of EU legislation, not to mention its complexity of language (bureaucratic legalese) that the vast amount is not even known about by our MPs [Members of Parliament], let alone finding time or opportunity to debate in our House of Commons. 
When you read this you will know just how far we have travelled down the road to totalitarianism, and a return to the crudities of religious (Christian) persecution associated with former times (the absolutism of the Stuart Kings and the notorious Star Chamber).  It is proposed (I quote from a small Christian newspaper):

“The provisions are simply appalling, so appalling that most people will not believe what we say until it is too late.  The aim seems to be the destruction of our Christian culture and the removal of any right for free speech on Christian matters.
Of course, it affects other religions, but somehow we doubt whether Moslems and atheists will get the same rough treatment [GW: You bet they won’t – it’s aimed at Christians – and in reality through them, an expression of hatred towards the Saviour].
Basically, if in the province of any service, that is, any public gathering or building or employment terms, you say or do something that another person claims to be offended by, then it is up to you, not the offended party (complainant), to prove that they are not offended.  Should you fail to prove this negative to the court’s satisfaction you are liable to pay compensation to which no upper limit is fixed!
All sorts of people can be affected, not just hoteliers, landlords, (almost anyone involved in a public ‘service’), and it could include publishing houses, schools,universities, preachers, doctors, lawyers, and almost any aspect of media transmission.
According to the Christian Institute: “The proposals explanatory notes make it clear that churches will be forced to consider practising homosexuals for youth worker posts, and similar roles if these become law.”

But the implications are far wider than this one example — for the proposals are so loose and vague in definition that it could be a ‘catch all’ for almost anything whereby somebody could claim to be “offended”  
This is dangerous in and of itself as you will know, but it has other severe possible repercussions, for it reverses the historic principle of the presumption of innocence until proved guilty, would be a draconian inhibition of free speech and expression, and freedom of association.
(All in theory protected under our own Constitution and Bill of Rights and later Human Rights Act with which they come into conflict)
Let me give you an example of this heinous “law” in action.

Under existing “Equality” law:
A Christian couple, owners of a small hotel in the UK, had an open discussion in their own premises, a private conversation, with a Muslim guest. The discussion ranged over Mohammed, the person of Christ etc.  The guest left the hotel and later “reported” the conversation to the police, and they in turn charged the couple with a crime (not yet known) because they defended their faith and criticised Islam).
It is extremely unlikely that the charge will be continued or the couple taken to court, but of course the damage has been done. It is the intimidating nature of these laws that will “chill” free speech in almost any context.
Why “unlimited fines,” reserved usually for serious crimes such as robbery, violence, etc? Clearly there is a harsh vindictive determination on the part of the EU and our government to crush any Christian witness in the public square.  (Acts 4 comes to mind “Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God – judge ye….”).
Two fine Christian organisations in the UK work tirelessly to defend such cases as above – The Christian Institute, and Christian Concern for the Nation. Both need our prayers and support.
It is no exaggeration to say, as CCFON states, that “This is a recipe for cultural genocide”

SIGN THE PETITION:

http://laiglesforum.com/2009/10/13/you-can-help-stop-world-dictatorship/

Afterword:

President Klaus has since caved in to enormous pressure and signed. But my readers are mostly people of faith, and there is still hope that the UK will vote out the current rascals and vote in a new more euroskeptic (anti-EU) government in the spring. Please, therefore, sign the petition to show that ordinary people aren’t buying into dictatorship without a fight.