In light of the pan-Middle Eastern conflicts currently ongoing at the behest of the West and its private army, the North Atlantic Terrorist Organisation (N.A.T.O.), it is disingenuous to claim that Cameron is promoting British defence firms. Who, during conflict, “promotes defence firms”?
This is nothing short of gun-running.
Cameron’s previous crimes especially:
David Cameron has insisted he made “no apology” for flying to the Gulf to bang the drum for British defence firms despite the poor human rights record in the region.
The Prime Minister faced heavy criticism for his three-day visit to Saudi Arabia, Oman and the United Arab Emirates last week, which was partly aimed at clinching orders for Typhoon jets.
Amnesty International accused him of a “deeply-disturbing trade-off” between trade and strategic interests and the promotion of human rights.
But delivering the annual Mansion House speech, Mr Cameron retorted: “We must support all sectors of the economy where we have a comparative advantage – and that includes defence.”
He said he understood why some critics were “a bit squeamish” about defence deals, but he insisted Britain had the most rigorous arms export licensing regime in the world.
He added: “Every country in the world has a right to self-defence. And you cannot expect every country to be self-sufficient in providing the tanks, ships and planes needed.
“So when Britain has a very strong defence industry, with 300,000 jobs depending on it, it’s right we should be at forefront of this market, supporting British jobs and British allies.”
He said 300,000 jobs depended on the Typhoon contracts, which are worth around £6bn.
In the speech, regarded as the Prime Minister’s main foreign affairs address of the year, he argued that Britain had to fight vigorously for a share of trade in rapidly-growing export markets.
Since coming to office, he has led trade missions to Africa, Indonesia, China, India, Russia, Mexico, Brazil, Japan and Malaysia.
“I know there are some people who say that’s not real foreign policy. Or worse still, it’s just globetrotting. But I say there is a global race out there to win jobs for Britain and I believe in leading from the front. So I make no apology for linking Britain to the fastest growing parts of the world.”
He announced the appointment of trade envoys to promote British businesses in Mexico, South Africa, Morocco, Indonesia, Kuwait, Vietnam, Algeria and Kazakhstan.
He also mounted a strong defence of the City of London against critics whom he accused of wanting to “trash” the banks.
He pointed out that the financial services sector contributes one-eighth of Britain’s tax revenue and underpins jobs for two million people.
“Yes, some utterly terrible mistakes were made and they need to be addressed properly so they can never happen again.
“But those who think the answer is just to trash the banks, would end up trashing Britain,” Mr Cameron said.
“I say – recognise the enormous strength and potential of our financial sector, regulate it properly and get behind it.”
Read on: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-makes-no-apology-for-controversial-visit-to-the-gulf-to-promote-british-defence-firms-8307188.html
Imagine a government that would deliberately take millions away from the budget meant to educate its own nation’s children, while at the time use billions to send foreign aid to other nations who don’t need it?
That would be nothing less than treason. You cannot imagine any sane government doing such a thing. Think of, for example, China, or Japan, deliberately depriving its own people of an education while giving money to Korea? It just wouldn’t happen, because the Chinese and the Japanese would—rightly—regard that as nothing less than treason.
Of course, you guessed it: Britain’s House of Treason down by the banks of the old river, has done precisely that—and no-one seems to know or care.
The Tory-Lib-Dem-Labour party—because they are just all the same party—is busy with much-vaunted “budget cuts” to “save the economy” (after they and their big business bank cronies screwed it over in the first place) and one of the first cuts to be announced was in the education arena.
Any parent with university-age going children is well aware that uni fees have now rocketed from a manageable amount just two or three years ago, to an impossible £9,000 per year—and that is just for the tutoring fees, never mind books, resources, living allowances, residence and so on.
Even those students “lucky” enough to get loans, start off their working lives with tens of thousands of pounds of debt—an impossible burden which—even more importantly—makes starting a family next to impossible.
The nuts and bolts of the process are as follows: England’s university budgets were cut by £449 million in 2010, with similar cuts being added each following year. This means that over £1.3 billion has been cut in the last three years, and there is no end yet in sight. By the end of 2014, the total uni education budget cut will be cut by nearly £4 billion.
In practical terms, this means that the universities have had at least 6,000 fewer places each academic year.
In addition, research funding has been frozen and the uni buildings budget cut by 15 percent.
At the same time, the Government has announced that taxpayers will hand over £50.8 billion in foreign aid to the Third World by 2014. This translates to 61 percent of the total “spending review” cuts announced by the Government.
According to a press release issued by the Department for International Development (DFID), the total foreign aid budget will reach the targeted 0.7 percent of Gross National Income (GNI) by 2013.
This would mean a yearly spend of £12.6 billion, the DFID said.
This increased spending, the DFID said, is “in line with the UK’s international commitments to help those living in extreme poverty in our world. Over the course of the Spending Review period, the Department for International Development will increase resource spending by 35 percent in real terms, and increase capital spending by 20 percent in real terms.”
This means that the foreign aid budget was £8.4 billion in 2010, £8.7 billion in 2011, £9.1 billion in 2012, and will be £12.0 billion in 2013, and £12.6 billion in 2014—totalling £50.8 billion by the end of 2014.
So there you have it: cut the education budget by £4 billion, but boost the foreign aid budget by £50 billion.
Who would dare call it treason? I for one, and I am increasingly becoming convinced that the last honest man to pass through the halls of Westminster was indeed Guy Fawkes.
A “EUROPE4ALL”? Where then is the swastika? Keen observers will also note that the Hammer and Sickle appears the most times on this poster.
Question: Why is it illegal to fly the Nazi swastika flag but is more than acceptable to fly the flag of the Soviet Union, the Hammer and Sickle?
Answers below, please.
Take a close look at this promotional poster. Notice anything? Alongside the symbols of Christianity, Judaism, Jainism and so on is one of the wickedest emblems humanity has conceived: the hammer and sickle.
For three generations, the badge of the Soviet revolution meant poverty, slavery, torture and death. It adorned the caps of the chekas who came in the night. It opened and closed the propaganda films which hid the famines. It advertised the people’s courts where victims of purges and show-trials were condemned. It fluttered over the re-education camps and the gulags. For hundreds of millions of Europeans, it was a symbol of foreign occupation. Hungary, Lithuania and Moldova have banned its use, and various former communist countries want it to be treated in the same way as Nazi insignia.
Yet here it sits on a poster in the European Commission, advertising the moral deafness of its author (I hope that’s what it is, rather than lingering nostalgia). The Bolshevist sigil celebrates the ideology which, in strict numerical terms, must be reckoned the most murderous ever devised by our species. That it can be passed unremarked day after day in the corridors of Brussels is nauseating.
By Daniel Hannan M.E.P.
One of this blog’s oldest friends, Azad Ali, has a great new post. As the Harry’s Place blog reports, Azad is the new vice-chair of Unite Against Fascism, the ostensibly anti-racist group (in fact more of a meal-ticket for the leadership of the Socialist Workers’ Party.)
Azad is the community affairs co-ordinator of the extremist Islamic Forum of Europe, which controls the East London Mosque and which isdedicated, in its own words, to changing the “very infrastructure of society, its institutions, its culture, its political order and its creed … from ignorance to Islam.” Through “hisbah” (the enforcement of Islamic law) and “jihad,” it aims to create a “global” Islamic dictatorship, the caliphate, and its “primary work” in this “is in Europe, because it is this continent, despite all the furore about its achievements, which has a moral and spiritual vacuum.”
The IFE has already made some progress towards its goal, exercisingstrong influence over Tower Hamlets Council through its close ally, the elected mayor, Lutfur Rahman. Lutfur’s council has been busily engaged in enforcing Islamic law on, for instance, local strip clubs and a gay pub. At the last election Azad and the IFE also helped to deliver extraordinary and unprecedented swings in their East London heartland for their equally close friend, Ken Livingstone (Ken had given the East London Mosque more than £1 million of City Hall money to build the IFE a new headquarters, despite the strenuous objections of his officials.)
Azad has written on his IFE blog of his “love” for Anwar al-Awlaki, the al-Qaeda cleric. He used to attend talks by Al-Qaeda’s main representative in the UK, Abu Qatada. He has described al-Qaeda as a “myth” and said that the Mumbai terrorist attacks were not terrorism. On his IFE blog, he advocated the killing of British troops in Iraq (he sued a newspaper for reporting this, and lost.) Filmed by an undercover reporter for my Channel 4 Dispatches on the IFE, Azad said: “Democracy, if it means at the expense of not implementing the sharia, of course no-one agrees with that.” His response to this exposure was to threaten our undercover reporter.
It would, I think, be fair to describe Azad Ali as an Islamic fascist.
And Azad’s immediate boss, UAF’s chair, is… Ken Livingstone. In this small world, isn’t it fascinating how the same names keep cropping up?
A LABOUR councillor has been suspended after provoking outrage on Facebook.
Sunderland City Councillor Florence Anderson “liked” a comment that called for an IRA bomb at the next Conservative conference.
The comment was posted on the Facebook Group titled “Margaret Thatcher doesn’t have to be dead before we give her a funeral” – of which Miss Anderson is a member.
A Labour party spokesman confirmed that Miss Anderson had been suspended from the party in light of the comments.
They said: “These comments are disgraceful. Florence Anderson has been suspended from the Labour Party with immediate effect in light of this information.”
Crash Bang Wallace blogger Mark Wallace was the first to highlight that Ms Anderson had “liked” the comment: “We are appealing to the IRA to find it in their hearts to bomb the next tory conference(sic)” on the facebook group wall.
David Cameron has made another decisive break with the Conservative Party’s past by admitting that Margaret Thatcher had been wrong to brand Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC) “terrorists” during the struggle against apartheid.
The Tory leader, who met Mr Mandela during a visit to South Africa last week, said:
“The mistakes my party made in the past with respect to relations with the ANC and sanctions on South Africa make it all the more important to listen now. The fact that there is so much to celebrate in the new South Africa is not in spite of Mandela and the ANC, it is because of them – and we Conservatives should say so clearly today.”
Writing in The Observer, Mr Cameron praised the former South African president as “one of the greatest men alive” and said his overwhelming impression was “not how violent the armed struggle or Soweto uprisings were, but how restrained”.
The Foreign Secretary’s remarks to the BBC Radio 4 Great Lives programme condoning terrorism in some circusmstances are an absolute disgrace, and should be disowned by the Prime Minister. The Radio 4 interview focused on the life of South African Marxist Joe Slovo, a leading member of Umkhonto we Sizwe, the military wing of the African National Congress (ANC). The ANC’s bombing campaign included the targeting and killing of civilians.
As The Daily Mail reports, when asked by presenter Matthew Parris whether terrorism can ever be justified, Miliband stated:
“Yes, there are circumstances in which it is justifiable, and yes, there are circumstances in which it is effective.”
“The importance for me is that the South African example proved something remarkable: it looked like a regime that would last forever, and it was blown down.”
“It is hard to argue that, on its own, a political struggle would have delivered. The striking at the heart of a regime’s claim on a monopoly of power, which the ANC’s armed wing represented, was very significant.”
Take a look at what the “glorious” people of the “Rainbow nation” did to innocent farmers. Is that what Mr. Miliband regards as “justifiable”? (Please brace yourself for these extremely disturbing images)
David Miliband’s spending on his constituency home was so extensive that even his gardener questioned whether some of the costs were strictly necessary.
Over five years, Mr Miliband spent just under £30,000 on repairs, decoration and furnishings for his £120,000 home in South Shields.
On at least one occasion, he exceeded the maximum allowable amount and had his claim cut back. Mr Miliband, the current Foreign Secretary, spent up to £180 every three months on his garden, prompting his own gardener at one point to ask whether all the work was required.
In April 2008, on the bottom of a receipt for £132.96, the gardener wrote: “Please let me know if you would like pots making up at front and back this year, given the relatively short time you’ll be here and their labour-intensive nature.”
Under the rules, MPs may claim for basic garden maintenance, but not: “plants, shrubs, flowers, hanging baskets or other decorations”.
In 2005, Mr Miliband fell foul of rules which prohibit MPs from claiming any costs relating to their children. His application for reimbursement for a £199 pram and £80 in “baby essentials” were both rejected.
In another breach of the guidelines, Mr Miliband regularly claimed about £89 for undisclosed “household items”. In 2006, the then-environment secretary was told that he needed to provide details of his claims, and that part of his payment would be held back until he did. He wrote back withdrawing the claims, saying: “I am afraid I have not been able to lay my hands on the receipts for the items so we had better leave the payment as you have made it. I will keep a closer guard of the receipts in future.” Mr Miliband failed to resubmit his claim, even when the fees office wrote back advising that he did not need to provide receipts, but just to supply details of the items. He was not asked to repay his previous claims over several months, or provide information about the items that he had bought at taxpayers’ expense.
During the five years covered by the receipts, Mr Miliband successfully claimed for a £412 hand-crafted chair, a goose-down duvet and chenille throw from Marks & Spencer, a £450 “Gatsby” John Lewis sofa, and a washing machine and tumble dryer, some of which were ordered in the name of his American wife, Louise, a concert violinist.