We are seeing the end of democracy when ‘the mob’ think they are entitled to overturn the result of a general election or a referendum. But the mob should be careful what they wish for – the alternative is government by dictators and historical examples in the last century – Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Tito, Hitler, Franco, Mussolini etc. – are not so very appealing. First the mob drives out a democratically elected government or an existing tyranny, but then a new tyrant arises who murders those who might oppose him (including members of ‘the mob’)
Below ‘The Mob’ outside Downing Street after the General Election waving the Hammer and Sickle of the former Soviet Union. Do they know how many millions of people were tortured and murdered on the orders of Stalin and on the orders of those that preceded and succeeded him? Or do they not care?
Well that went well !
A worthless piece of Paper from a Germany intent on creating The 3rd Reich – which would last a thousand years. In fact it lasted less than 12 years.
One wonders how long the 4th Reich (aka EU, aka European Superstate, aka Fortress Europe) will last.
[And talking of worthless pieces of paper there is the Paris Climate Change Agreement – it is easy to sign a piece of paper as a previous Chancellor of Germany discovered – but if there are no sanctions and no enforcement, and there are none in relation to the Paris agreement then it means nothing. So whether the USA signs up to it or not makes no difference]
It follows the full text transcript of Neville Chamberlain’s Peace in Our Time speech, delivered at the Heston Aerodrome near London, UK – September 30, 1938.
|There’s only two things I want to say.|
First of all, I have received an immense number of letters during all these anxious times, and so has my wife. Letters of support, and approval, and gratitude and I can’t tell you what an encouragement that has been to me. I want to thank the British people for what they have done.
Next. And next I want to say that the settlement of the Czechoslovakian problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace.
This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and here is the paper which bears his name upon it as well as mine. Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you,
“We, the German Fuhrer and Chancellor, and the British Prime Minister, have had a further meeting today and are agreed in recognizing that the question of Anglo-German relations is of the first importance for the two countries and for Europe.
“We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German naval agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again.
“We are resolved that the method of consultation shall be the method adopted to deal with any other questions that may concern our two countries and we are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe.
[Chamberlain later appeared together with the King and Queen on the Buckingham Palace balcony. Still later, he spoke from the window of 10 Downing Street the following:]
My good friends,
This is the second time in our history that there has come back from Germany to Downing Street peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time.
We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. And now I recommend you to go home and sleep quietly in your beds.
Just 2 years and 8 months after this speech the maternal grandparents of Anthony Sargeant went home to ‘sleep quietly’ in their beds in the Anderson Shelter at the bottom of their garden on the Bellingham Council Estate in South London. They were killed by a German High Explosive bomb on the last night of the London Blitz which targeted the civilian population.
We keep seeing decent law abiding British Muslims speaking on television news after the murder of 22 young people in Manchester claiming that “Islam is a religion of peace”. For them it may be so – they are decent good people. But it just will not do.
The reality is quite different for millions of Muslims in many countries around the world. That is why murderous atrocities, of which Manchester is but one example, have been committed by Muslims who believe they are carrying out the will of God, and that they will be rewarded in heaven.
There are many places in world where Muslims approve, encourage or condone the murder of apostates, and blasphemers. In many Muslim majority countries this is written into the law. For millions of Muslims the punishment for adultery is for women to be buried up to their necks and stoned to death. Homosexuals are killed. Women are subjugated – misogyny is hardly adequate to describe the place of women in many Muslim societies: In which societies, for example, an almost impossible burden of proof falls on the woman in cases of rape and failure to prove her case means she is guilty of adultery and the consequence is death. Beheadings, amputation of limbs, and floggings are considered just punishments. Fatwas – death warrants – are issued by Islamic leaders against public figures in distant lands. Forced Marriages of young girls and so-called honour killings take place, not just in Muslim majority countries but here in the self-isolating Muslim communities in Europe. And so the distressing litany could go on.
The point is that for many millions of Muslims this is part and parcel of their religion. They would not recognise or accept the view of those decent Muslims interviewed on British Television News following the mass murder of children in Manchester. Those interviewees with their statements that “Islam is a religion of peace” are understandably attempting to counteract any backlash against the British Muslim community most of whom are good and decent people.
But it simply will not do.
The Twin Towers, the London Bus and Tube attacks, Paris, Nice, Germany, US Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, Suicide bombers around the world – the litany goes on and on. Murderous atrocities committed against civilian populations by Muslims believing that Allah is great and that they will be rewarded in heaven.
Of course they are deluded, not least in a belief in a mythological God and a life hereafter but that does not help the victims of their religiously inspired murders. Murders committed in the name of Islam. To keep trotting out the line that “Islam is a religion of peace” simply will not do. For every peace-loving law abiding Muslim there are many others around the world, but also in our midst, who take a completely different view, despising and seeking to kill Kafirs (non-Muslims). Moreover, those that have come to the West, ostensibly as refugees and asylum seekers, are capable of infecting other Muslims born here with their religious justification of murder. Most especially this becomes the case where isolated and self-isolating communities are created within the host society. Communities that seek to impose Sharia law and create Sharia Courts independent of the host country’s judicial system. Where the Iman is considered the supreme authority, interpreter and moral arbiter by the Islamic men attending the mosque: Supreme above the established values and moral code of the host society. Where schooling in urban areas becomes segregated on religious grounds with what are essentially Islamic academies operating and funded within the State System.
Enoch Powell warned of the dangers of creating isolated and self-isolating communities within the host society in 1968. He was derided, ignored, and pronounced anathema by the liberal political system: But in essence his analysis and predictions have sadly proven to be accurate.
I do not know what the solution is for my good Muslim friends living in the UK nor for British Society as a whole. It may already be too late. But there will be no possibility of any solution if the denial continues and the issues are not addressed.
To keep repeating the mantra “Islam is a religion of peace” simply will not do.
Comment by Anthony J Sargeant
I empathize with my Scottish friends who want Scotland to become an independent self-governing country. What I then find difficult to understand is that the SNP, who are demanding a second referendum in anticipation of securing a ‘Yes’ vote for Scottish Independence, are doing so with the express aim of then joining the EU.
There is no logic in this position because this would mean becoming independent from one Union only to become a very small province within the much larger European Superstate project. With a population roughly equivalent to Slovakia the Scots would be entitled to about 12 MEP seats in the European Parliament out of the total as set by the Lisbon Treaty of 751: That is about 1.6% of the total MEP seats.
Compare that with the nearly 10% of seats that Scotland has in the House of Commons (59 out of a total of 650 – that latter figure being made up of 533 English, 59 Scottish, 40 Welsh and 18 Northern Irish). Even that 1.6% would depend upon the EU principle of “degressive proportionality ” continuing in the future (basically giving small EU countries more seats than their population warrants on strict proportionality – and by the way don’t you just love the labyrinthine ways and terminology of the European project?).
1.6% voting rights (equivalent to Slovakia) does not sound as if Scotland would have very much influence or independence as the EU political project moves towards ever closer political, social and financial integration.
Furthermore as a new state applying to join the EU Scotland would, like all other new applicants, have to agree to join the Eurozone and adopt the Euro as currency.
Inevitably this would require a further surrender of independence and control since the Scottish economy and financial affairs, and therefore ultimately all social and political policy, will be determined by the European Central Bank based in Germany.
Now nobody would suggest that Scotland is the equivalent to Greece, but the Greek experience is a salutary one. The ECB in its attempt to preserve the Eurozone has required Greece to adopt extreme austerity measures leading to widespread poverty, emigration of its young people, and starvation in the countryside. A pattern echoed in other poor EU countries.
The European Central Bank is based in Frankfurt. At the moment its President is Mario Draghi who was previously head of the Italian Central Bank (the Italian economy being such a wonderful success story – irony) but much more to the point he was Managing Director of Goldman- Sachs International : The very bankers consulted by the EU to assess the Greek Economy when it applied to join the Eurozone and who reported back that everything was fine and to “go ahead” let Greece join the Eurozone. Goldman-Sachs were alleged to have directly conspired to hide Greek debt using so-called ‘off-market swaps’.
In this context and to urge further caution it is interesting to note that in order to join the Eurozone Greece was restricted in the amount of olive oil that it could export to the EU (because Spain and Italy wanted to preserve their preferential markets). The curious result is that Greece then sold their ‘above EU quota’ to Israel, who then resold it to Italy who then incorporated it (quite within the byzantine rules) into processed “Italian” Olive Oil.
There is no question but that on joining the EU Scotland would have to give up any rights to control its enormous and valuable resource which is its wonderful fisheries leaving them open to the depredations of Spanish super-trawlers which routinely land above quota catches in Spain without effective control and with resultant destruction of the sea bed and fish stocks in Scottish waters. The loss of independence and therefore the ability to control a sustainable fisheries policy for the benefit of Scotland would be an economic as well as an environmental disaster for Scotland.
So with a role equivalent to Slovakia in an EU parliament dominated and largely controlled by the Germany economy, and understandably geared to the benefit of Germany, Scotland would have no real independence. Scotland like the other small European “Provinces” would have little direct control over its economy (“Provinces” because the aim clearly stated by the EU is for further integration and central control – thus loss of nationhood). There might still be a Scottish ‘Parliament’ in Holyrood but that would become the equivalent of a Parish Council meeting in the village hall commenting on planning applications but with no actual power.
In conclusion I do wonder what those brave Scottish Military personnel who suffered and died to defeat German domination of Europe in two World Wars, the last in my lifetime, would make of a surrender of their precious nationhood and independence to a German dominated European Superstate – The 4th Reich by any other name.
But, if I were Teresa May I would not hesitate. I would include in the Tory Manifesto for the upcoming UK General Election an absolute commitment to hold a second referendum on Scottish independence in the lifetime of the next parliament. The Scottish people can then decide for themselves whether to become independent from the United Kingdom – and if they so decide many, including myself, would wish them well.
I just hope that they do not then seek to surrender that new found independence to a German Hegemony in a European Federated Superstate.
Actually the Bill is an “incorporation” of all existing EU laws and regulations into UK law. The Bill is repealing nothing except the jurisdiction of the EU and European Courts. Apart from necessary technical changes about the naming of authorities who will arbitrate when there are disputes nothing will be different.
EU workers’ rights as they exist today will become UK workers’ rights, EU environmental laws will become UK environmental laws and so on and so forth. Of course at some time in the future it is possible that a democratically elected UK government may seek to improve upon existing, that is previously EU, laws in the interests of the UK – but that will be a decision of just that, a democratically elected UK government.
The Bill should more correctly referred to as ‘The Great Incorporation Bill’ designed as it is to incorporate EU laws and regulations into UK law.