Who will stop the EU from breaking its own law?

Paul Goodman believes that Cameron is "off the hook on the veto", and "on it over more IMF money".

The UK's agreement to IMF funds being used to bail out eurozone countries is dependent upon the principle that "the IMF lends to countries, not currencies", says Cameron.

And what if the Eurozone becomes a 'country'?

Will not the ESM treaty together with the plethora of other treaties, a central bank as lender of last resort and accession of member states' fiscal sovereignty essentially mean that the Eurozone / EU becomes a country?

If so, then Cameron gets to fund further bailouts via the IMF without breaking his word or "misleading" Parliament.

Isn't the EU so devoid of options that it will use any tool at its disposal? How many rules and laws have thus far been bent to save the Euro? Since nobody's challenging them on their previous transgressions, why should they not push their luck further still?

Who is going to stop them? 

Tax revolt: Ant Power

Fraser Nelson can't see any difference between Gordonomics and Osbornomics because there isn't any - what we have is continuity of agenda, presided over by the civil service. Our government is run by corporate interests, for corporate interests.

Mr Hartnett, the civil servant who did sweetheart deals with Vodafone and Goldman Sachs - massively reducing their tax bills -  thinks that it is our duty to rat on people who pay cash for transactions. Poster haphaestus (with 671 recommends at the time of writing), dispatches this notion unequivocally:

Just like here in Canada, my message to the tax collectors is this:

Let us, the average income earners, us working class, know when you have:
(1) eliminated tax loopholes for filthy rich, and corporations
(2) eliminated government waste
(3) eliminated ridiculously obscene gold pensions and "perks" (free lunches and booze) for MP's

and then maybe I will start to feel guilty about doing my very best to keep your grubby little meathooks out of my wallet!

We remain in thrall to a tiny band of people who have convinced us that it is our moral and patriotic duty to pay to keep them and their ilk in clover and in power.

But is it?

LarkenRose (talking to James Corbett) doesn't think so. If you can't see the MP3 player below, you can listen to the interview here.





Our government has torn our democracy assunder and yet still believes it has the right to tax us into oblivion while spraying our money at its corporate friends.

When voting makes no difference, when protest is made ever more difficult, when free speech is under attack, when more rules, regulations and legislation are heaped upon us, when our backs are broken by a kleptocratic 'elite', why should we put up with it?

RBS hearing on FSA report: Deceit, misdirection, fallacy

A very slippery pair are Bill Knight and Sir David Walker, who today, gave evidence to the HoC Treasury Committee* - in particular, on the failure of the RBS report to grapple with the culpability of RBS executives or its regulators in the run-up to the "financial crisis".




According to this pair, there was no wrong-doing by the FSA or RBS. At all.  "Mistakes" were made, they say with straight faces.

While it was good to see the two getting a grilling from skeptical MPs, I hope the latter weren't taken in. Misdirections, evasions, straw men, fallacies,  circular arguments were effortlessly and expertly woven into their narratives. Such are the tactics used by those who seek to deceive.

MPs' questions were littered with innuendo, barely whispered hints that something grave and dark lurked beneath - whether due to fear of reprisals is impossible to say, but not difficult to imagine.  Certainly, the "witnesses" and committee members are protected by Parliamentary Privilege, so the threat of law suits is somewhat diminished.

The calm, imperiousness that the pair seemed keen to convey, sought to hide, I believe, knowledge of criminal activity - or incompetence, at least.Will the Committee winkle out the deceits and take the necessary action, or will those responsible for impoverishing this nation go unpunished? Or will pressure be put upon them to return to "business as usual"?

---

* HoC Treasury Ccommittee

Thatcher Room  Meeting started at 10.02am. Ended at 11.54am Financial Services Authority report into RBS Witnesses Bill Knight and Sir David Walker Visit the Committee's homepage.

The Left hate being proved wrong, but invariably are

The Left hate being proved wrong, which is why they hate Maggie T.

Their 'arguments' are ideological to the point where facts must be hidden/spun/denied if they don't support the dogma. The Left takes a strand of truth and weaves a web of lies around it, using every disreputable tactic at their disposal to protect their  indefensible dogma and its policy spawn.

One
basic
truth can
be used as
a foundation for
a mountain of lies,
and if we dig down deep
enough in the mountain of lies,
and bring out that truth, to set it
on top of the mountain of lies; the entire
mountain of lies will crumble under the weight of
that one truth, and there is nothing more devastating to a
structure of lies than the revelation of the truth upon which
the structure of lies was built, because the shock waves of
the revelation of the truth reverberate, and continue to
reverberate throughout the Earth for generations to
follow, awakening even those
people who had no
desire to be
awakened
to the
truth.

-- Delamer Duverus

If there's one thing the Left excels at, it's being wrong. 

Militarisation: Pullitzer Prize journalist sues Obama over NDAA

Lest we forget that the militarisation of civilian space is global ...



"Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges has filed suit against President Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta to challenge the legality of the National Defense Authorization Act, which includes controversial provisions authorizing the military to jail anyone it considers a terrorism suspect anywhere in the world, without charge or trial."

"Sections of the bill are written so broadly that critics say they could encompass journalists who report on terror-related issues, such as Hedges, for supporting enemy forces.

"It is clearly unconstitutional," Hedges says of the bill. "It is a huge and egregious assault against our democracy. It overturns over 200 years of law, which has kept the military out of domestic policing.""

Democracy Now speaks to Hedges, "a senior fellow at the Nation Institute, and former New York Times foreign correspondent who was part of a team of reporters that was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 2002 for the paper's coverage of global terrorism."

Hat tip: Democracy Now

"Nobody ever lost money lending to the IMF": there's always a first time

At last, someone is calling Osborne and Cameron out on their oft-repeated "no government has ever lost money on lending to the IMF".  Here's what Cameron said in November last year:

"No government has ever lost money on lending to the IMF. It does not put British taxpayer money at risk. I'm not asking British taxpayers to contribute to the IMF because Europe has not done enough."

"Britain will not invest in the eurozone bailout fund, Britain will not invest in the IMF so that the IMF can invest in the eurozone bailout fund. Resourcing the IMF is not a substitute for the eurozone dealing with its own problems."

"The Greeks have to decide, do they want to stay in the eurozone and accept the package offered? What they can't do is string this out endlessly."

Hmmm.

Points to ponder:

1. the IMF cannot lend to the eurozone because it is a currency, not a country ...
2. therefore, it will have to become a country before it can be bailed out ...
3. therefore, the ESM will have to be ratified for this to occur and,
4. "Britain’s banks have $359bn of exposure to the private debt of the GIIPS quintet of Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, and Italy"

When 1, 2 and 3 occurs, the EU becomes a totalitarian German-dominated country, or a two-tier trading/monetary arrangement, or it combusts.

Despite Osborne's seemingly resolute and iron-clad assurance that he would not allow IMF funds to be diverted to the eurozone, he will. Just as the ESM will be ratified* - unless MPs rebel.

MPs need to put country before party or preferment and give Cameron and Osborne unequivocal notice that they will not permit a backdoor euro bailout via the IMF and nor will they permit the ESM treaty to be ratified unless the UK's status is legally adjusted to that of trading partner, only.

---

* As Denis Cooper notes:

"To be clear about this, British MPs will not be able to rebel over ratification of the intra-eurozone ESM treaty.

The UK will not be a party to that treaty, and so it will not need to be ratified by the UK before it can come into force, and so MPs will not be asked to pass a Bill to approve it.

The point at which British MPs would have the opportunity to rebel would be when the government introduced a Bill to approve the major EU treaty change agreed on March 25th 2011, the EU treaty change to grant the eurozone states the right under EU law to proceed with the ESM (and potentially do much more besides).
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do...

This is why the French Prime Minister recently said:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/05/eurozon...

"We need to ratify the treaty establishing the European Stability Mechanism and the corresponding revision of the European treaty so that this fund can enter into service from the month of July 2012"."

Tax black hole

Many taxes are simply an inefficient merry-go-round of taking a tenner in taxation, spending a fiver of it on administration and paying people to work in non-jobs, only to give what is left of it to gullible voters, bail out a bank, buy windmills, send it overseas, disappearing into the unknown faster than an economic migrant who made it to London.

Nicked from a Telegraph comment (and slightly modified).

Quiet Revolution

Peter Oborne has pretty much nailed the problems that we face.

boudicca's response rounded it off beautifully:

I agree with this article.  The emergence of a financially superior and detatched class, often not British, but using the UK as a base and not contributing towards society is a dangerous development.  The fact that many of these individuals are directly responsible for the banking crisis and forced austerity on the rest of society, makes it even more volatile.

But we mustn't forget that our political elite are also culpable.  They have courted these immensely rich people and made themselver subservient to the demands of high finance and big business.  They no longer even listen to the demands of the ordinary taxpayer, let alone respond to them.

Hence we find the UK trapped inside the EU because the globalists of Big Business want it.  We have to suffer mass immigration because Big Business wants an unlimited stream of low-paid workhorses.  At the same time, the elite from all sides (banking, business, politics) cushion themselves from the effects of their avariciou,s mutually beneficial policies.

The British people are far too tolerant.  We have never had a revolution because, ultimately, we believe that order and proper  government is better for all.  But if things carry on as they are, we will increasingly see social breakdown and violent rejection of the elite's construct.  And they will deserve it.

The British people are effectively disenfranchised.  We can vote.... but voting changes nothing.   We are still in the EU; immigration continues unchecked; taxes rise for the workers but not for the rich; politicians are remote and unaccountable (the EU even more so); Bankers collect their bonuses; Big Business raises its charges and so do the local authorities.

A revolution is long overdue.

So how do we go about it?  Who do we go after?

I propose starving the beast: the corporations and their co-parasites, the Treasury.

Start with this:

• Close accounts in global banks (e.g., Lloyds, RBS) - instead use local Mutual.
• Boycott the supermarkets (e.g., Tesco, Lidl) - instead use Mom & Pop stores. They can do with the business, because the government is killing them.
• Pay down debt (e.g., credit card, mortgage) -  ASAP and never take on more.
• Reduce consumption and buy only goods that last, preferably from neighbours, car boot sales or other non-establishment outlets.
• Don't buy what you can make, yourself.
• Barter.
• Pay cash wherever possible - foil their tracking systems which enable them to target taxation finely at the middle classes, based on data mining info fed to them by the banks.
• Grow your own food. Who needs the toxins in the nutrient-deficient junk that the supermarkets sell, anyway! Else, buy from a local farm and pay cash. I bet the farmer could use the money.
• Walk or cycle more often. Don't use public transport or your car, where possible. 
• Make plans to get off the grid (water, electricity, gas, etc.).
• Avoid government levies wherever possible.
• Buy gold and be sure to take immediate physical delivery of it.

Generate other ideas for shrinking their empire - and get others to do the same.

I'd wager that a 10% drop in profits will be enough to kill many blood-sucking corporations off.

Hundreds of individual actions by individual people all over the world, slowly chipping away at their wealth by the simple withdrawal of custom: take your custom to those who you think deserve it.

Think of an ant's nest. Ants are tiny but, en-masse, they can wipe the forest floor clean and devour species many times their size. Whilst we may be small individually, mass action would be an unstoppable force.

It doesn’t even require large scale organisation. Each person acting in isolation adds to the weight of the power we can collectively wield.

The simple action of only using cash is the easiest place to start.

Politicians and financial elites underestimate us “lower beings”, we’re adaptable, resourceful and much, much tougher than we are given credit for.

Related:

• Don't cap it, scrap it - Old Holborn

Douglas Carswell slams sham Recall of MPs Bill at Hearing

Today, Douglas Carswell, Zac Goldsmith, Peter Facey (Unlock Democracy) and Dr Alan Renwick of the University of Reading testified at the HoC Political and Constitutional Reform Committee hearing* to make the case for recall of MPs and officials.



All of them agreed (as did the Committee), that the government's recall bill, if implemented, would have the opposite effect on politics to what its proponents purport to want. It would cause further deterioration in confidence in the democratic process.

Dr Alan Renwick, who doesn't seem to value accountability highly, asserted that of all actions that could be taken to improve the democratic process, recall was the least effective.

First, on what facts does he base his assertion? He began his evidence claiming that he believes that policy should be evidence-based. Did he provide any to back up his assertions?

Second, even if facts did support his assertion that recall was the least effective measure to improve our democracy, should that be sufficient reason to not to implement it as one of a range of measures?

As Cameron is so fond of saying, just because we can't do everything, doesn't mean we can't do anything.

---

* HoC Political and Constitutional Reform Committee hearing, 19 Jan 2012:

Witnesses

1. Douglas Carswell MP, Zac Goldsmith MP, and Peter Facey, Unlock Democracy
2. Dr Alan Renwick, University of Reading

Visit the Committee's homepage.

Costa Concordia to costa lotta insurance money

... as much as $1 billion, we're told. Or perhaps not quite so much. It is thought to be the worst maritime loss in history, to be covered by insurers which include Lloyd's XL.

Allegedly, "Officials at XL and London-based RSA declined to comment", although

"Pier Luigi Foschi, chairman of Carnival’s Italian subsidiary Costa Crociere, said the company is “very well covered” at a press conference in Genoa today."

No doubt, variations in the Concordia story will emerge that will be at odds with what has been written by the corporate media this week.

Related:

• Blurring the chain of responsibility - Richard North, EU Referendum