Reported Post by chikrodah

chikrodah · 18-03-2008, 11:30 AM

chikrodah has reported a post.

Reason:

Quote:

Elements of this post are likely to leave to forum open to legal action. Where is the evidence for paedophiles and perverts in senior positions within the party leaderships and senior judges? Noakes has already clashed with senior Tories on this subject; we don't need the forum targetted by CCO or others.

Post: Seven deadly Lisbon Treaty clauses
Forum: European Union
Assigned Moderators: N/A

Posted by: davidnoakes
Original Content:

Quote:

Many thanks again.

1. The EU has taken control of our party leaderships and senior judges. Over 20 years they have used the party list system to appoint anti-EU MPs, which is how they got 332 MPs to vote for the abolition of Britain on 21st January. They've deliberately moved paedophiles and other perverts into many senior positions, and control our Ministers with bribery and blackmail.

The EU has successfully built a puppet government inside Westminster.

Over ten years the EU has used this parliament to pass the laws of a police state in Britain, waiting to be enforced when the EU takes over on 1.1.2009.

They have taken control of the top of the legal profession in a similar way, and the EU's Common Purpose 26,000 members wield enormous power in local government and the police.

Our soldiers have already been told they will have to sign an oath to the EU or be fired.

The Exchequer's biggest expenditure is the £167 billion pa it pays to bribe the over 100,000 influential people it has appointed to direct our new 8,500 quangos with £250,000 salaries to smooth the way for the EU.

The EU will almost certainly complete its control of our police, armed forces and population by the close of 2009.

The Reform Treaty removes the last 20% of Westminster's power on 1.1.2009, when it becomes defunct.

The EU's six constitutional treaties deceptively state they "take primacy" over the British constitution. In English, that means they will abolish it.

Parliament's five year term expires on 5th May 2010. Under what constitution can new parliamentary elections be held? Not the EU's, it makes no provision for them. Not the British, it will be superceeded.

There will be no legal way to have an election.

The EU can correctly state that we had an EU election on 11.6.2009, and another for Westminster on 5.5.2010 is unconstitutional, and in any case Westminster has been defunct and powerless for 17 months, so why would anyone want to vote for it?

The appeal is to EU judges. But our Westminster puppet government is pro-EU; it won't appeal against its own masters. If it did, EU judges have to interpret the treaties in accordance with the policy of 'ever closer union" They would clearly rule NO to a Wesminster election.

The EU's case could hardly be stronger. They won't bother to spin it - they will have military control of our population.

2.) I used to live in the USA, but this is no longer my subject. My understanding was the Chapter 322 society (or Skull and bones, USA's version of the Bilderbergers, but 550 members instead of 140), mainly Republicans, and visibly led by the Bush family, will collapse the dollar. But don't quote me.

The EU will collapse Sterling next. See eutruth.org.uk/eu200bn.htm. Could be this year, though they planned it for 2009.

3.) You haven't read that link in full. The EU plans to destroy Sterling and Britain permanently. They will keep us in abject poverty outside the Euro.

4. No longer my subject. My understanding was 9/11 was organised by GHW Bush, and he had his former partner Osama bin Laden murdered on 15th July 2001 after his 2 week treatment for kidney dialysis as he left the hospital in Riyadh. But don't quote me.

I am sure our government was involved with 7/7. It is part of the EU's plan to create hatred for Muslims as Germany did for the Jews. The EU's first nuclear war will almost certainly be against the Muslim oil nations.

The EU is our bit of the New World Oder, the one world government predicted for millennia.

5.) I ran for the leadership of UKIP in 2006. came 4th and last, but they were surprised I got 11.5%. I was the only candidate with a plan to attack the EU.

I left the party in Feb 2007 because the leadership and staff are all salaried by the EU. They close down good anti EU local campaigns, ensure there are no national ones, keep members in enforced idleness, rig elections to ensure incompetents hold senior positions, and are very clearly, like the lib-lab-con, working for the EU.

And no, I don't ususally discuss the NWO stuff. I've got enough to do fighting the EU.

Hartlepool · 18-03-2008, 01:37 PM

Isn't this just DNs opinions that he has presented here?

The Bear · 18-03-2008, 02:53 PM

That is not defence for the administrator or owner of the forum.

Here is what I have cobbled together on the subject of defamation.

The communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressively stated or implied to be factual, that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government or nation. constitues a tort and as such is actionable in UK law.

That a fact may be true is no defence where a person publicly reveals information which is not of public concern and the release of which would offend a “reasonable person”.

It's a grey area all round and very often people simply withdraw and pay up rather than face their day in court.

Aardvark · 18-03-2008, 02:59 PM

It is opinion stated as fact; no intelligent person would believe a scintilla of what David Noakes has posted.

It doesn't name a living individual other than George Bush, the world's most powerful elected representative, and he is not going to worry about David Noakes (who?). The allegation of the placing of paedophiles and perverts in high places will not attract libel cases, but will just tend to make this forum a laughing stock amongst political blogs and other fora.

Outside of a decreasing number of Eurosceptics, David Noakes has, IMHO, no personal credibility whatsoever. It's not worth trying to give him an infraction as it will appeal to his sense of victimisation by EU disinformation specialists. I think we can indulge him a little longer.

To be honest being insulted and abused by David Noakes is a badge of honour. I find it refreshing to be seen as worthy of attack by a scion of the Eurotruth (b@llsh|t and drivel faction) complement on this forum. David Noakes believes himself to be an important man, a leader and intellectual who is superior to us mere mortals. I'd hate to feed his delusions.

Hartlepool · 18-03-2008, 03:01 PM

So stating a fact is not a defence?

The mind boggles,deeper and deeper....

Aardvark · 18-03-2008, 03:02 PM

Bear,

"where a person publicly reveals information which is not of public concern and the release of which would offend a “reasonable person”." is drawn from privacy laws in the USA and doesn't apply in the UK.

Aardvark · 18-03-2008, 03:05 PM

H, IIRC, in English libel law the fact that something is true is a defence.

Mikeuk · 18-03-2008, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aardvark

H, IIRC, in English libel law the fact that something is true is a defence.

Of course this was not necessarily the case in the past. Truth was not an absolute defence against proceedings for Criminal Libel and it was also possible to sue on behalf of the dead.

However since Sir James Goldsmith's attempt to revive the law of Criminal Libel against Private Eye collapsed years ago it is unlikely to trouble us in the future.

Be that as it may, I think Mr Noakes is going to find himself in deep **** one of these days.

18-03-2008, 02:59 PM	#4 (permalink)
Aardvark Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Oxonia Posts: 3,133	It is opinion stated as fact; no intelligent person would believe a scintilla of what David Noakes has posted. It doesn't name a living individual other than George Bush, the world's most powerful elected representative, and he is not going to worry about David Noakes (who?). The allegation of the placing of paedophiles and perverts in high places will not attract libel cases, but will just tend to make this forum a laughing stock amongst political blogs and other fora. Outside of a decreasing number of Eurosceptics, David Noakes has, IMHO, no personal credibility whatsoever. It's not worth trying to give him an infraction as it will appeal to his sense of victimisation by EU disinformation specialists. I think we can indulge him a little longer. To be honest being insulted and abused by David Noakes is a badge of honour. I find it refreshing to be seen as worthy of attack by a scion of the Eurotruth (b@llsh\|t and drivel faction) complement on this forum. David Noakes believes himself to be an important man, a leader and intellectual who is superior to us mere mortals. I'd hate to feed his delusions. __________________ When in Woking do as the Wokes do. "I do not wish to form my opinions by thoughtlessly quoting others; I wish others to support their opinions by sensibly quoting me." Paul Wesson (Aardvark) 13th April 2008

18-03-2008, 03:02 PM	#6 (permalink)
Aardvark Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Oxonia Posts: 3,133	Bear, "where a person publicly reveals information which is not of public concern and the release of which would offend a “reasonable person”." is drawn from privacy laws in the USA and doesn't apply in the UK. __________________ When in Woking do as the Wokes do. "I do not wish to form my opinions by thoughtlessly quoting others; I wish others to support their opinions by sensibly quoting me." Paul Wesson (Aardvark) 13th April 2008

18-03-2008, 03:05 PM	#7 (permalink)
Aardvark Moderator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Oxonia Posts: 3,133	H, IIRC, in English libel law the fact that something is true is a defence. __________________ When in Woking do as the Wokes do. "I do not wish to form my opinions by thoughtlessly quoting others; I wish others to support their opinions by sensibly quoting me." Paul Wesson (Aardvark) 13th April 2008

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

18-03-2008, 01:37 PM	#2 (permalink)
Hartlepool Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: North East England Posts: 6,443	Isn't this just DNs opinions that he has presented here?

18-03-2008, 02:53 PM	#3 (permalink)
The Bear Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: East Anglia Posts: 1,776	That is not defence for the administrator or owner of the forum. Here is what I have cobbled together on the subject of defamation. The communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressively stated or implied to be factual, that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government or nation. constitues a tort and as such is actionable in UK law. That a fact may be true is no defence where a person publicly reveals information which is not of public concern and the release of which would offend a “reasonable person”. It's a grey area all round and very often people simply withdraw and pay up rather than face their day in court.

18-03-2008, 03:01 PM	#5 (permalink)
Hartlepool Uber Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: North East England Posts: 6,443	So stating a fact is not a defence? The mind boggles,deeper and deeper....